Facilities Improvements

[OUG]

I was thinking today, after seeing an article (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/06/arts/ ... wanted=all) in the NYT about Columbia's new athletics facility in Inwood, Manhattan, that with the Stadium now underway, it is worth thinking about Tulane's other facilities priorities.

From my standpoint, the stadium was a priority, but I really don't want to hash that argument out again in this thread, there are better places for it.

In my opinion, our priorites, in order, should be:

1) Track and Tennis: Between Men's and women's Tennis and men's and women's track and field, a quarter of our varsity team's have lost their facilities. Beginning these facilities ASAP has to be a priorty. I'm not positive how big the "off-campus athletics village" site is, but at minimum you need a tennis stadium/facility, and a track and infield.

2) Offices and training facilities for non-revenue sports: All of these sports need to be moved from the Wilson Center to the track/tennis site. The Wilson Center would then become a Football only facility and the training center and offices would be for football only as well as th AD staff (and maybe not even them). Basketball and volleyball would use the Hertz Center of course.

3) Indoor practice facility for football: Others may disagree, but I think having the Saints practice facility available for most spring sessions helps us a great deal in the near term. Down the road, I think an IPF at the off-campus athletics site built for football but available for other sports would be a boost to the program. The trick would be getting enough use out of it to justify the expenditure. It can't just be a rain facility for fall practice.

4) Basketball Overhaul: I don't believe that with the Big East C-7 schools gone, we will be demanded to play games at the N.O. Arena. We will now be playing the same schools we played in C-USA, plus occasional games against Temple, UConn, and Cincinatti. That is not enough to abandon Devlin. But we definitely need to explore a long term option for basketball that is suitable for a major conference.

What are others' thoughts? Again, I'd really like to not rehash the stadium argument.

[Fred Dowler]

I realize that the vision of the Eamon Kelly administration was for TU to use the New Orleans Arena for bball but even if you had decided by, say, 2001 or 2002 to not take that route then Fogelman/Devlin Arena was and is still not a suitable option for the long term.

Replacing it with a nice, decent-sized arena with, say, 7500-9000 seats should have been top priority over everything else long ago. Yes, that means baseball, too.

Right now as things stand, though, TU is going to be stuck with Fogelman/Devlin indefinitely. TU is not in a position to do what it needs to do and is going to have to do at some point, if the program is ever going to be taken half as seriously as it once was, and that's because the wrong-headed school leadership has been determined to do things that it did not need to do.

[msdos]

i'd say new arena in the area between hertz and the wilson center.

ipf where old practice field was.

both can probably be done for that $50 mil they have for the stadium

[mbawavefan12]

My thoughts.........we are screwed and so far behind.

Not sure the best route as kicking out teams (tennis, track) with no clear indication of where they will play is right in line with the RD regime, I feel for those programs.

The city or a local school is doing over the track at Harrell Stadium, maybe that will help in the interim.

I am sure they counted on a $4-5mm annual BE payment to help support new projects, ooops. The land for the proposed athletics village seems pretty large (went for a run through it the other day). That is not the best area, aside from Oschner's presence, so I think they could make a cheap play to some of the neighboring owners if need be. Looks industrial, could be some major environmental issues.

All in all, it will be pretty embarrassing to have Bball teams with real NCAA goals and aspirations for the B5 (UConn, Memphis, Cincy etc) come play in a gym that is over 2000 seats less then all of our conference mates. That experience will only validate the C7 attacks on TU. Of course, that should really help attendance unless we are just totally awful.

My list:
1) Figure out a suitable home for tennis and track. I guess you can stick them at Gormley, should just about destroy recruiting.
2) Upgrade the weight room, training and academic support facilities
3) Renovate Devlin to 5500K, just get it done.
98) Add seats to Yulman after two straight bowl games
99) Athletes village
100) IPF, would love it but with this admin and our other needs it will have to be the Saints facility and the heat.

[wavedat]

I was thinking today, after seeing an article (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/06/arts/ ... wanted=all) in the NYT about Columbia's new athletics facility in Inwood, Manhattan, that with the Stadium now underway, it is worth thinking about Tulane's other facilities priorities.

From my standpoint, the stadium was a priority, but I really don't want to hash that argument out again in this thread, there are better places for it.

In my opinion, our priorites, in order, should be:

1) Track and Tennis: Between Men's and women's Tennis and men's and women's track and field, a quarter of our varsity team's have lost their facilities. Beginning these facilities ASAP has to be a priorty. I'm not positive how big the "off-campus athletics village" site is, but at minimum you need a tennis stadium/facility, and a track and infield.

2) Offices and training facilities for non-revenue sports: All of these sports need to be moved from the Wilson Center to the track/tennis site. The Wilson Center would then become a Football only facility and the training center and offices would be for football only as well as th AD staff (and maybe not even them). Basketball and volleyball would use the Hertz Center of course.

3) Indoor practice facility for football: Others may disagree, but I think having the Saints practice facility available for most spring sessions helps us a great deal in the near term. Down the road, I think an IPF at the off-campus athletics site built for football but available for other sports would be a boost to the program. The trick would be getting enough use out of it to justify the expenditure. It can't just be a rain facility for fall practice.

4) Basketball Overhaul: I don't believe that with the Big East C-7 schools gone, we will be demanded to play games at the N.O. Arena. We will now be playing the same schools we played in C-USA, plus occasional games against Temple, UConn, and Cincinatti. That is not enough to abandon Devlin. But we definitely need to explore a long term option for basketball that is suitable for a major conference.

What are others' thoughts? Again, I'd really like to not rehash the stadium argument.

An IPF for football is absolutely first and should be built on campus where our practice facility is.

Next is a new arena for basketball either on Rosen or where Devlin is now.

There is no athletics village. It is just something thrown out there to try and distract fans from the incompetence of the athletic department. There are absolutely no plans in place for that land. Hell no one even knows what shape that land is in or how accessible it is. It is miles from campus. Track and Tennis are in City Park and will stay there as will offices and training for those sports.

[OUG]

i'd say new arena in the area between hertz and the wilson center.

ipf where old practice field was.

both can probably be done for that $50 mil they have for the stadium

Right, but we're building a stadium on that site.

So, in light of that reality, what are your priorities?

[mbawavefan12]

An IPF before a suitable basketball arena....really? Not what I would do. Also, remember that an new Bball arena could save $$ on graduation and host other events (NIMBY concerns aside).

[OUG]

An IPF before a suitable basketball arena....really? Not what I would do. Also, remember that an new Bball arena could save $$ on graduation and host other events (NIMBY concerns aside).

There's an argument to be made that an offsite IPF where the rest of the proposed village is located is much more viable a project than a new arena on campus (in the short run).

[Fred Dowler]

My thoughts.........we are screwed and so far behind.

Not sure the best route as kicking out teams (tennis, track) with no clear indication of where they will play is right in line with the RD regime, I feel for those programs.

The city or a local school is doing over the track at Harrell Stadium, maybe that will help in the interim.

I am sure they counted on a $4-5mm annual BE payment to help support new projects, ooops. The land for the proposed athletics village seems pretty large (went for a run through it the other day). That is not the best area, aside from Oschner's presence, so I think they could make a cheap play to some of the neighboring owners if need be. Looks industrial, could be some major environmental issues.

All in all, it will be pretty embarrassing to have Bball teams with real NCAA goals and aspirations for the B5 (UConn, Memphis, Cincy etc) come play in a gym that is over 2000 seats less then all of our conference mates. That experience will only validate the C7 attacks on TU. Of course, that should really help attendance unless we are just totally awful.

My list:
1) Figure out a suitable home for tennis and track. I guess you can stick them at Gormley, should just about destroy recruiting.
2) Upgrade the weight room, training and academic support facilities
3) Renovate Devlin to 5500K, just get it done.
98) Add seats to Yulman after two straight bowl games
99) Athletes village
100) IPF, would love it but with this admin and our other needs it will have to be the Saints facility and the heat.

Yep...TU is screwed and really far behind as things stand right now.

With regards to tennis, whether people realize it or not, tennis even more than baseball or anything else has been TU's best performing program throughout its existence. The last time that TU won an official NCAA championship in anything -- the only time? -- was in tennis. And yet who knows what tennis is going to do now? City Park?

This "Athletes Village??" For real or just mere talk? If the former, then why has the talk died down now? Where's the big fundraising drive? Why, if it's for real, didn't they announce that project at the same time as the announcement about the football stadium, given that they're going to have these facilities replaced?

Fogelman/Devlin needs to be replaced, period. Any sizeable chunk of dollars thrown into that building, which reached its useful life span long ago, is a waste.

[mbawavefan12]

My thoughts.........we are screwed and so far behind.

Not sure the best route as kicking out teams (tennis, track) with no clear indication of where they will play is right in line with the RD regime, I feel for those programs.

The city or a local school is doing over the track at Harrell Stadium, maybe that will help in the interim.

I am sure they counted on a $4-5mm annual BE payment to help support new projects, ooops. The land for the proposed athletics village seems pretty large (went for a run through it the other day). That is not the best area, aside from Oschner's presence, so I think they could make a cheap play to some of the neighboring owners if need be. Looks industrial, could be some major environmental issues.

All in all, it will be pretty embarrassing to have Bball teams with real NCAA goals and aspirations for the B5 (UConn, Memphis, Cincy etc) come play in a gym that is over 2000 seats less then all of our conference mates. That experience will only validate the C7 attacks on TU. Of course, that should really help attendance unless we are just totally awful.

My list:
1) Figure out a suitable home for tennis and track. I guess you can stick them at Gormley, should just about destroy recruiting.
2) Upgrade the weight room, training and academic support facilities
3) Renovate Devlin to 5500K, just get it done.
98) Add seats to Yulman after two straight bowl games
99) Athletes village
100) IPF, would love it but with this admin and our other needs it will have to be the Saints facility and the heat.

Yep...TU is screwed and really far behind as things stand right now.

With regards to tennis, whether people realize it or not, tennis even more than baseball or anything else has been TU's best performing program throughout its existence. The last time that TU won an official NCAA championship in anything -- the only time? -- was in tennis. And yet who knows what tennis is going to do now? City Park?

This "Athletes Village??" For real or just mere talk? If the former, then why has the talk died down now? Where's the big fundraising drive? Why, if it's for real, didn't they announce that project at the same time as the announcement about the football stadium, given that they're going to have these facilities replaced?

Fogelman/Devlin needs to be replaced, period. Any sizeable chunk of dollars thrown into that building, which reached its useful life span long ago, is a waste.

Depends on reno cost vs demo/rebuild. I think the old building is in line with our old private school brand and could be a selling point over traditional facilities. For example if costs were equal I would take a reno Devlin at 5500 then a new 7500. Though I am nostalgic.

[sader24]

1) IPF
2) Basketball Arena
3) Football Operations Center/Academic Center for student athletes.

[mbawavefan12]

Someone is going to have to explain to me how an IPF is more valuable then a decent Bball arena? Most of our peers (Houston, SMU, USF, Miami, Southern Miss, even Vandy though UCF does) have an IPF. Hell even Florida and Fla St. are just getting around to an IPF. Our Bball facility is leaps and bounds behind everyone else. Hell we have the oldest and smallest Bball arena in the new CUSA!!!!!

[jonathanjoseph]

Someone is going to have to explain to me how an IPF is more valuable then a decent Bball arena? Most of our peers (Houston, SMU, USF, Miami, Southern Miss, even Vandy though UCF does) have an IPF. Hell even Florida and Fla St. are just getting around to an IPF. Our Bball facility is leaps and bounds behind everyone else. Hell we have the oldest and smallest Bball arena in the new CUSA!!!!!

Because the economics of the football program drive everything else around college athletics.

[tgw]

First and foremost, we need to think in terms of what makes us attractive to other conferences:

1. Basketball arena - at least 6-7K whether it's a renovation of Devlin or a new one

2. IPF - it's a priority for practical reasons (recruiting and weather), but do the Big 12 or ACC care if we have one or not?

3. Non-revenue stuff - sorry, but those sports are not even on the radar when it comes to conference realignment

[OUG]

First and foremost, we need to think in terms of what makes us attractive to other conferences:

1. Basketball arena - at least 6-7K whether it's a renovation of Devlin or a new one

2. IPF - it's a priority for practical reasons (recruiting and weather), but do the Big 12 or ACC care if we have one or not?

3. Non-revenue stuff - sorry, but those sports are not even on the radar when it comes to conference realignment

I think you're wrong on #3. Success on the field or at the box office? -- not so much. But having at least legitimate programs that don't play at city parks? Yeah, I bet they see that as table stakes. You don't get considered unless you have that. There are some standards for non-revenue sports. We can't have our tennis teams playing in some public park. They'll see it as symbolic of a shoestring athletic department, no matter the quality of the other sports.

Besides, its relatively cheap and quick. It is low-hanging fruit. Not building those facilities makes you appear to be a penny pincher.

[Fred Dowler]

Yep...TU is screwed and really far behind as things stand right now.

With regards to tennis, whether people realize it or not, tennis even more than baseball or anything else has been TU's best performing program throughout its existence. The last time that TU won an official NCAA championship in anything -- the only time? -- was in tennis. And yet who knows what tennis is going to do now? City Park?

This "Athletes Village??" For real or just mere talk? If the former, then why has the talk died down now? Where's the big fundraising drive? Why, if it's for real, didn't they announce that project at the same time as the announcement about the football stadium, given that they're going to have these facilities replaced?

Fogelman/Devlin needs to be replaced, period. Any sizeable chunk of dollars thrown into that building, which reached its useful life span long ago, is a waste.

Depends on reno cost vs demo/rebuild. I think the old building is in line with our old private school brand and could be a selling point over traditional facilities. For example if costs were equal I would take a reno Devlin at 5500 then a new 7500. Though I am nostalgic.

Whatever people say, in my eyes, it just does not appear that the geographic space where Fogelman/Devlin is and where the other buildings and streets around it are really and truly permits what TU needs in a bona fide first-class bball facility and I have really tough believing that it does (just like I have a really tough time believing that in actual fact the geographic space of the erstwhile Westfeldt Practice Field permits anything more than the rinkiest-dinkiest football stadium).

You could maybe squeeze in a few hundred more seats. I just can't see much more than that. And the building is 80-plus years old and has already been renovated over and over and over and over again and some more.

[tgw]

First and foremost, we need to think in terms of what makes us attractive to other conferences:

1. Basketball arena - at least 6-7K whether it's a renovation of Devlin or a new one

2. IPF - it's a priority for practical reasons (recruiting and weather), but do the Big 12 or ACC care if we have one or not?

3. Non-revenue stuff - sorry, but those sports are not even on the radar when it comes to conference realignment

I think you're wrong on #3. Success on the field or at the box office? -- not so much. But having at least legitimate programs that don't play at city parks? Yeah, I bet they see that as table stakes. You don't get considered unless you have that. There are some standards for non-revenue sports. We can't have our tennis teams playing in some public park. They'll see it as symbolic of a shoestring athletic department, no matter the quality of the other sports.

Besides, its relatively cheap and quick. It is low-hanging fruit. Not building those facilities makes you appear to be a penny pincher.

You asked for priorities. I'm not saying don't do #3 at all. I just don't think it should be anywhere near the priority of the first two and I doubt that the Big 12 or ACC would turn us down because our tennis or track facilities were subpar. They might, though, if our basketball or football facilities weren't up to snuff. Look, the Big East was going to make us play in N.O. Arena. The basketball facility is important.

[OUG]

First and foremost, we need to think in terms of what makes us attractive to other conferences:

1. Basketball arena - at least 6-7K whether it's a renovation of Devlin or a new one

2. IPF - it's a priority for practical reasons (recruiting and weather), but do the Big 12 or ACC care if we have one or not?

3. Non-revenue stuff - sorry, but those sports are not even on the radar when it comes to conference realignment

I think you're wrong on #3. Success on the field or at the box office? -- not so much. But having at least legitimate programs that don't play at city parks? Yeah, I bet they see that as table stakes. You don't get considered unless you have that. There are some standards for non-revenue sports. We can't have our tennis teams playing in some public park. They'll see it as symbolic of a shoestring athletic department, no matter the quality of the other sports.

Besides, its relatively cheap and quick. It is low-hanging fruit. Not building those facilities makes you appear to be a penny pincher.

You asked for priorities. I'm not saying don't do #3 at all. I just don't think it should be anywhere near the priority of the first two and I doubt that the Big 12 or ACC would turn us down because our tennis or track facilities were subpar. They might, though, if our basketball or football facilities weren't up to snuff. Look, the Big East was going to make us play in N.O. Arena. The basketball facility is important.

Another way of looking at the N.O. Arena situation is that a basketball facility would NOT be an obstacle in our conference situation.

Georgetown, Memphis, St. Johns, and others play in NBA arenas. Unlike college football, where you are hard pressed to find teams that "make it work" in NFL stadiums, it is not uncommon to play basketball off campus in large, pro-sized arenas.

Just food for thought. I'm not saying we don't need a new basketball facility, in fact I would argue that its highly preferable to the N.O. Arena. I'm just saying that the Big East admission proves that it isn't impossible.

[wavedat]

First and foremost, we need to think in terms of what makes us attractive to other conferences:

1. Basketball arena - at least 6-7K whether it's a renovation of Devlin or a new one

2. IPF - it's a priority for practical reasons (recruiting and weather), but do the Big 12 or ACC care if we have one or not?

3. Non-revenue stuff - sorry, but those sports are not even on the radar when it comes to conference realignment

I think you're wrong on #3. Success on the field or at the box office? -- not so much. But having at least legitimate programs that don't play at city parks? Yeah, I bet they see that as table stakes. You don't get considered unless you have that. There are some standards for non-revenue sports. We can't have our tennis teams playing in some public park. They'll see it as symbolic of a shoestring athletic department, no matter the quality of the other sports.

Besides, its relatively cheap and quick. It is low-hanging fruit. Not building those facilities makes you appear to be a penny pincher.

You asked for priorities. I'm not saying don't do #3 at all. I just don't think it should be anywhere near the priority of the first two and I doubt that the Big 12 or ACC would turn us down because our tennis or track facilities were subpar. They might, though, if our basketball or football facilities weren't up to snuff. Look, the Big East was going to make us play in N.O. Arena. The basketball facility is important.

Another way of looking at the SuperDome situation is that a football facility would NOT be an obstacle in our conference situation.

Georgetown, Memphis, St. Johns, and others play in NBA arenas. Unlike college football, where you are hard pressed to find teams that "make it work" in NFL stadiums, it is not uncommon to play basketball off campus in large, pro-sized arenas.

Just food for thought. I'm not saying we don't need a new basketball facility, in fact I would argue that its highly preferable to the N.O. Arena. I'm just saying that the Big East admission proves that it isn't impossible.

FIFY. If you think the BE didn't find our basketball facility big enough the Big 12 isn't going to want anything to do w/a 25,000 or less seat football stadium. That's why so many are listing IPF first. It helps our recruiting which helps us to win which helps us get in the Big 12. We don't need a small, cheap stadium and people don't want it. Tulane is $20 million short per Dickson in a recent chat. They need to see the light and get it right.

[Bigschtick]

New basketball facility, no question about it. When I see some of the facilities on TV, its
just embarrassing to think about what Tulane has. Even little University of San Diego had a real nice
basketball arena. I think around 7k maybe. Very nice. The admin will continue to make Tulane a national
laughing stock. Nothing I have seen so far convinces me otherwise.. No real commitment to winning.

[OUG]

First and foremost, we need to think in terms of what makes us attractive to other conferences:

1. Basketball arena - at least 6-7K whether it's a renovation of Devlin or a new one

2. IPF - it's a priority for practical reasons (recruiting and weather), but do the Big 12 or ACC care if we have one or not?

3. Non-revenue stuff - sorry, but those sports are not even on the radar when it comes to conference realignment

I think you're wrong on #3. Success on the field or at the box office? -- not so much. But having at least legitimate programs that don't play at city parks? Yeah, I bet they see that as table stakes. You don't get considered unless you have that. There are some standards for non-revenue sports. We can't have our tennis teams playing in some public park. They'll see it as symbolic of a shoestring athletic department, no matter the quality of the other sports.

Besides, its relatively cheap and quick. It is low-hanging fruit. Not building those facilities makes you appear to be a penny pincher.

You asked for priorities. I'm not saying don't do #3 at all. I just don't think it should be anywhere near the priority of the first two and I doubt that the Big 12 or ACC would turn us down because our tennis or track facilities were subpar. They might, though, if our basketball or football facilities weren't up to snuff. Look, the Big East was going to make us play in N.O. Arena. The basketball facility is important.

Another way of looking at the SuperDome situation is that a football facility would NOT be an obstacle in our conference situation.

Georgetown, Memphis, St. Johns, and others play in NBA arenas. Unlike college football, where you are hard pressed to find teams that "make it work" in NFL stadiums, it is not uncommon to play basketball off campus in large, pro-sized arenas.

Just food for thought. I'm not saying we don't need a new basketball facility, in fact I would argue that its highly preferable to the N.O. Arena. I'm just saying that the Big East admission proves that it isn't impossible.

FIFY. If you think the BE didn't find our basketball facility big enough the Big 12 isn't going to want anything to do w/a 25,000 or less seat football stadium. That's why so many are listing IPF first. It helps our recruiting which helps us to win which helps us get in the Big 12. We don't need a small, cheap stadium and people don't want it. Tulane is $20 million short per Dickson in a recent chat. They need to see the light and get it right.

I think I covered that issue.

[msdos]

To anyone wondering why an ipf is more important than bball arena:

Football is the highest grossing sport. To get money you need to win games. T win games, you need better players. To get better players, you need to get into the recruiting arms race and part of that is an ipf.

[Fred Dowler]

Is it completely out of the question that as things stand right now TU could figure out a way to build an indoor football practice building somewhere? It depends on how much they want to but if they really, really wanted to proceed with such a project, I would not say that all hope for it is lost.

OTOH if using the New Orleans Arena is deemed not to be the route that they want to follow then it would seem that as things stand now almost no matter what TU is very much locked into using the same old Fogelman/Devlin gym, which another poster has accurately described as an embarrassment for a supposedly major college bball venue in the 2000's, for the long term.

[sader24]

I think an IPF would be drastically cheaper than an Arena and therefore could be built sooner than said Arena. I also think with the new upgrade to Devlin it's highly unlikely we'll see anything on that front anytime soon. From my point of view the sports should be taken care of facility wise in order of importance. We've done everything backwards. We should've built the football stadium before the new baseball stadium. Our options and space for building would've been greater. Next should've been an IPF, followed by BBall Arena, followed by Baseball stadium, followed by Basketball Practice Facility, followed by Academic Center/Football Operations Center, followed by 3rd tier sports. Of course what we really should have done was buy up property around the University on the cheap after Katrina which would've given us alot more options now. We are a University that responds to immediate situations instead of planning for future ones. The result seems to be we are constantly reacting instead of dictating and directing our own course. Kind of like our Athletic Teams perform. On our heels leaning backwards instead of on our toes leaning forwards.

[Fred Dowler]

I think an IPF would be drastically cheaper than an Arena and therefore could be built sooner than said Arena. I also think with the new upgrade to Devlin it's highly unlikely we'll see anything on that front anytime soon. From my point of view the sports should be taken care of facility wise in order of importance. We've done everything backwards. We should've built the football stadium before the new baseball stadium. Our options and space for building would've been greater. Next should've been an IPF, followed by BBall Arena, followed by Baseball stadium, followed by Basketball Practice Facility, followed by Academic Center/Football Operations Center, followed by 3rd tier sports. Of course what we really should have done was buy up property around the University on the cheap after Katrina which would've given us alot more options now. We are a University that responds to immediate situations instead of planning for future ones. The result seems to be we are constantly reacting instead of dictating and directing our own course. Kind of like our Athletic Teams perform. On our heels leaning backwards instead of on our toes leaning forwards.

Have to strongly agree on that they've done it all completely and thoroughly backward and that's how you've ended up with only a minimal-size available space for the football stadium.

And even though the baseball program at TU has had the history of success and support that it's had I still say that it's a serious blunder to be taking care of that sport ahead of taking care of anything else and that right there is at the core of the problem.

And they've had this property in Jefferson Parish that they could have been using all these years and we've barely heard anything about it. Tell me that's not sketchy.