Both Montana schools get in Top 5 FCS Stadiums

[PlayerRep]

2 ivy league schools blow the ass off scat back stadium. Princeton and Yale for sure...maybe 3 (Harvard holds 30k) actually. Plus their not draped in "Dickies"(looking like clowns) on an ESPN playoff T.V. game getting their ass blown off in utter humiliation :egriz:

Seriously, you're making yourself look like a clown. MSU has a good stadium now (HUGE improvements from what they had 5 years ago). And how they do in the playoffs has nothing to do with the stadium, which this thread is about. You have better opinions about what your top five stadiums are? List them out and quit derailing a decent thread. We have that happening to too many threads already. :roll:

Yes, MSU has a pretty good stadium now, although a bit dis-jointed due to the phases of building it. The larger stadium appears to have contributed to the improvement in the quality of the program.

Of the Ivy stadiums, Harvard is the coolest stadium, in my opinion. Yale, Penn and Princeton too. The other 4 aren't too bad either, but not as good as the top 4. Lots of history at most of them. Here's a link to a short story with photos and information.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1137424-college-football-a-look-at-ivy-league-football-stadiums" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[rimrockgriz]

2 ivy league schools blow the ass off scat back stadium. Princeton and Yale for sure...maybe 3 (Harvard holds 30k) actually. Plus their not draped in "Dickies"(looking like clowns) on an ESPN playoff T.V. game getting their ass blown off in utter humiliation :egriz:

Seriously, you're making yourself look like a clown. MSU has a good stadium now (HUGE improvements from what they had 5 years ago). And how they do in the playoffs has nothing to do with the stadium, which this thread is about. You have better opinions about what your top five stadiums are? List them out and quit derailing a decent thread. We have that happening to too many threads already. :roll:

Google "best fcs stadiums" and take your pick of a dozen. :egriz:

 

[rimrockgriz]

2 ivy league schools blow the ass off scat back stadium. Princeton and Yale for sure...maybe 3 (Harvard holds 30k) actually. Plus their not draped in "Dickies"(looking like clowns) on an ESPN playoff T.V. game getting their ass blown off in utter humiliation :egriz:

Seriously, you're making yourself look like a clown. MSU has a good stadium now (HUGE improvements from what they had 5 years ago). And how they do in the playoffs has nothing to do with the stadium, which this thread is about. You have better opinions about what your top five stadiums are? List them out and quit derailing a decent thread. We have that happening to too many threads already. :roll:

I care about your opinion because....?? :egriz:

 

[EverettGriz]

The marked difference in funding for Admissions began under Denison, not Engstrom.

Now, back to stadiums.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[UMGriz75]

Yes, MSU has a pretty good stadium now, although a bit dis-jointed due to the phases of building it. The larger stadium appears to have contributed to the improvement in the quality of the program.

Qualitatively, it is better than what it was. However, it still has some elements of a high school stadium with a large barn shaped structure parked on top of one side. "Disjointed" may be one way of describing it, but it lacks the intimacy, and always will unless they can figure out a way to bring the seats in, of a truly first class facility.

UM really did some superb planning when they brought the stadium back to campus and put it where they did. That's "movie set" quality. There's nothing like it. When they figure a way to get Physical Plant out of there, and incorporate that magnificent location into a useful part of the image of the University, it will really be something.

The stadium design, even being in phases, has also been extremely well thought out, and throughout the phases, has been able to maintain a coherence to its overall appearance and "feel."

MSU's is, well, just kind of odd; like they tried to jump a couple of phases. There is no feeling of an integral design there; it's half of one kind of a stadium and half of another kind of stadium. I'm sure that will be cured in time, but right now it feels like a teenaged football stadium: awkward, gangly and not quite all "growed up" yet.

Too, sitting out in the middle of a field, which it always has, resulted in something of a disembodied feel to it, just as UM had when Dornblaser was out on South avenue. I mean, you can SEE the campus, but it doesn't really feel like PART of the campus. Back then, UM's at least had the feel of an urban setting.

MSU at least avoided the indignity of locating the stadium by the cow barns, but not by much.

Indeed, MSU's stadium location, ultimately desolate, unfortunately invites the photographic "Trail of Tears" spectacle and ... always will when they lose an important game by an unexpectedly large margin.

It's a movie set, like UM's, but for an entirely different kind of an end to the movie, and that's unfortunate because that will always be the easy frame of reference for sports writers and photographers.

The best thing MSU could do for its image is build something on that line of sight and get rid of it.

 

[Silvertip]

Over time Washington Grizzly Stadium has lost all of the future symmetry that was present when it was opened in 1986. Dennison metered out additional seats to meet, but not exceed demand, through three different tack-ons. The one AD Moos did in the end zones was marginally okay, but the highly engineered "batwings" from the Hogan era made zero sense. The money could have been far better spent with more desirable sideline seating (which in most programs demands a premium ticket price). The most recent addition proposed at 4,000 seats was cut in half by Dennison even though - as usual -he didn't get serious push back from the BOR. Probably more supply and demand philosophy at work. By contrast, check out most of the SEC stadiums that started out decades ago with hardly more seats than Wa-Griz, but today have a far more aesthetic appearance - because they had an overall master plan :!: ... Ever seen the Winchester House in San Jose which the rifle heiress just kept adding on to based on whim with no real idea as to what the final product might look like?... we're hardly in any position to put down the Cats when it comes to sensible facilities planning ...

 

[Hammer]

Over time Washington Grizzly Stadium has lost all of the future symmetry that was present when it was opened in 1986. Dennison metered out additional seats to meet, but not exceed demand, through three different tack-ons. The one AD Moos did in the end zones was marginally okay, but the highly engineered "batwings" from the Hogan era made zero sense. The money could have been far better spent with more desirable sideline seating (which in most programs demands a premium ticket price). The most recent addition proposed at 4,000 seats was cut in half by Dennison even though - as usual -he didn't get serious push back from the BOR. Probably more supply and demand philosophy at work. By contrast, check out most of the SEC stadiums that started out decades ago with hardly more seats than Wa-Griz, but today have a far more aesthetic appearance - because they had an overall master plan :!: ... Ever seen the Winchester House in San Jose which the rifle heiress just kept adding on to based on whim with no real idea as to what the final product might look like?... we're hardly in any position to put down the Cats when it comes to sensible facilities planning ...

So you don't like Wa Griz? Then don't go to games there. I absolutely love the place and think its beautiful. :clap:

 

[Montanan]

... I absolutely love the place and think its beautiful. :clap:

+5, what he said, only in in a darker more menacing font!

 

[Silvertip]

Over time Washington Grizzly Stadium has lost all of the future symmetry that was present when it was opened in 1986. Dennison metered out additional seats to meet, but not exceed demand, through three different tack-ons. The one AD Moos did in the end zones was marginally okay, but the highly engineered "batwings" from the Hogan era made zero sense. The money could have been far better spent with more desirable sideline seating (which in most programs demands a premium ticket price). The most recent addition proposed at 4,000 seats was cut in half by Dennison even though - as usual -he didn't get serious push back from the BOR. Probably more supply and demand philosophy at work. By contrast, check out most of the SEC stadiums that started out decades ago with hardly more seats than Wa-Griz, but today have a far more aesthetic appearance - because they had an overall master plan :!: ... Ever seen the Winchester House in San Jose which the rifle heiress just kept adding on to based on whim with no real idea as to what the final product might look like?... we're hardly in any position to put down the Cats when it comes to sensible facilities planning ...

So you don't like Wa Griz? Then don't go to games there. I absolutely love the place and think its beautiful. :clap:

...but then you think the Berkeley Pit is beautiful

 

[poorgriz]

Yes, MSU has a pretty good stadium now, although a bit dis-jointed due to the phases of building it. The larger stadium appears to have contributed to the improvement in the quality of the program.

Qualitatively, it is better than what it was. However, it still has some elements of a high school stadium with a large barn shaped structure parked on top of one side. "Disjointed" may be one way of describing it, but it lacks the intimacy, and always will unless they can figure out a way to bring the seats in, of a truly first class facility.

UM really did some superb planning when they brought the stadium back to campus and put it where they did. That's "movie set" quality. There's nothing like it. When they figure a way to get Physical Plant out of there, and incorporate that magnificent location into a useful part of the image of the University, it will really be something.

The stadium design, even being in phases, has also been extremely well thought out, and throughout the phases, has been able to maintain a coherence to its overall appearance and "feel."

MSU's is, well, just kind of odd; like they tried to jump a couple of phases. There is no feeling of an integral design there; it's half of one kind of a stadium and half of another kind of stadium. I'm sure that will be cured in time, but right now it feels like a teenaged football stadium: awkward, gangly and not quite all "growed up" yet.

Too, sitting out in the middle of a field, which it always has, resulted in something of a disembodied feel to it, just as UM had when Dornblaser was out on South avenue. I mean, you can SEE the campus, but it doesn't really feel like PART of the campus. Back then, UM's at least had the feel of an urban setting.

MSU at least avoided the indignity of locating the stadium by the cow barns, but not by much.

Indeed, MSU's stadium location, ultimately desolate, unfortunately invites the photographic "Trail of Tears" spectacle and ... always will when they lose an important game by an unexpectedly large margin.

It's a movie set, like UM's, but for an entirely different kind of an end to the movie, and that's unfortunate because that will always be the easy frame of reference for sports writers and photographers.

The best thing MSU could do for its image is build something on that line of sight and get rid of it.

Hmmm, well that was a fairly odd post, and peppered with several digs against the program... but here's a link to the longer term plan for turning it into a "Top Notch" facility if you're interested. As it is, for FCS, top 5 in the country though, so pretty damn good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaQVwJIe2C4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[UMGriz75]

Hmmm, well that was a fairly odd post, and peppered with several digs against the program... but here's a link to the longer term plan for turning it into a "Top Notch" facility if you're interested. As it is, for FCS, top 5 in the country though, so pretty damn good.

Well, I didn't mention the program, but I do think the facility was poorly sited and I thought so when I attended MSU way back when; just stuck out in the middle of a field like an afterthought, literally, "where can we put some bleachers? Well, there's an empty field, how about there?" It's either that empty field across from the heating plant, or the other empty field out by the cow barns. And they proceeded to send some guys out with pipes, boards and a pickup truck and just put together a multi-purpose track facility that could accommodate football games if they really had to. UM's Dornblaser was the same theory when they first took it off of campus.

 

[George Ferguson]

A couple of points, first off, totally disagree with EVERYTHING Silvertip said. While the last two expansions don't necessarily FIT the rest of the original stadium, in my opinion, Wash-Griz still looks uniquely amazing. Where is it written that football stadiums have to be bowl shaped or square shaped in perfect symmetry to be astetically pleasing to the eye?? When I am nearing the exit coming from Havre and the stadium comes into view, I still get a sense of pride every time, pride that this little tiny state, with NO professional sports has something so great as Wash-Griz. I felt that way 20 years ago, 10 years ago and I do now, and actually, with the addition of the Majestic Plaza, that view coming in from the interstate is the best the stadium has EVER looked in my opinion.

Secondly, while for a long time, Bobcat Stadium, and before when it was Reno H. Sales, may not have been on par with Wash-Griz or Kidd Brewer, but I for one never thought that it was a sub-par FCS stadium. I have sat in every section of the stadium, with the exception of the newest expansion, and have stood on the field for many games and I have never thought the place was as bad as so many Griz fans always said it was. It was never, and still isn't Wash-Griz, Kidd Brewer or JMU or a few of the FCS others, but it was never as bad a stadium as many liked to claim. And when they added the new press box and sky suites how many ever years ago, that was a great upgrade, and is still far BETTER, than what sits atop Wash-Griz to this very day. The press box and sky suites aren't even close in comparison. And anyone who knocks the improvements being made now, well I think that person is just jealous that modern improvements are being made in Bozeman. The new addition is nice, but what impresses me even more are the other new ammenites there. Scoreboard, HD video screen, concessions, landscaping and rest rooms. In other words, it's pretty hard to knock Bobcat Stadium for what it is now, and what it is becoming.

 

[PlayerRep]

A couple of points, first off, totally disagree with EVERYTHING Silvertip said. While the last two expansions don't necessarily FIT the rest of the original stadium, in my opinion, Wash-Griz still looks uniquely amazing. Where is it written that football stadiums have to be bowl shaped or square shaped in perfect symmetry to be astetically pleasing to the eye?? When I am nearing the exit coming from Havre and the stadium comes into view, I still get a sense of pride every time, pride that this little tiny state, with NO professional sports has something so great as Wash-Griz. I felt that way 20 years ago, 10 years ago and I do now, and actually, with the addition of the Majestic Plaza, that view coming in from the interstate is the best the stadium has EVER looked in my opinion.

Secondly, while for a long time, Bobcat Stadium, and before when it was Reno H. Sales, may not have been on par with Wash-Griz or Kidd Brewer, but I for one never thought that it was a sub-par FCS stadium. I have sat in every section of the stadium, with the exception of the newest expansion, and have stood on the field for many games and I have never thought the place was as bad as so many Griz fans always said it was. It was never, and still isn't Wash-Griz, Kidd Brewer or JMU or a few of the FCS others, but it was never as bad a stadium as many liked to claim. And when they added the new press box and sky suites how many ever years ago, that was a great upgrade, and is still far BETTER, than what sits atop Wash-Griz to this very day. The press box and sky suites aren't even close in comparison. And anyone who knocks the improvements being made now, well I think that person is just jealous that modern improvements are being made in Bozeman. The new addition is nice, but what impresses me even more are the other new ammenites there. Scoreboard, HD video screen, concessions, landscaping and rest rooms. In other words, it's pretty hard to knock Bobcat Stadium for what it is now, and what it is becoming.

Tip wants to move up so badly that he can't like or appreciate anything associated with FCS. When UM wins its next national championship, he'll be pooh-poohing it because it's not FBS and it may as well be the D-II championship.

 

[AZGrizFan]

I love Wa-Griz, and I think the boobscats did a commendable job with their newest additions to their stadium.

 

[Silvertip]

A glossed over fact is that MSU had planned to do the lower south bowl, then add the upper bowl later, but because they were able to raise/project the total $10 million needed through various means it became possible to do both steps at the same time. And it was their prexy Waded Cruzado who led the effort.

Factoid: Bobcat Stadium is laid out in an atypical NW by SE direction...Alfred Hitchcock would like that.

 

[rimrockgriz]

Bozeman State has made IMMENSE improvements at their facility.I'm not trying to take that away from them, but I'm not the one to sugar coat on egriz. A top 5 facility...??? Not even close...google and be just slightly objective. There is nothing wrong with their south bowl as far as visual symmetry and body count. However our "batwings" move the corner crazies closer (triple alliteration... :lol: ) to the field which is paramount. Factor in hellgate canyon, mount sentinel, and the big hole denny dug it's a recipe for decibals. For you simpletons, their elongated, one piece curve takes the fan "AWAY" from the field on the rounded areas. As I've said before my spouse was a season ticket holder a A.S.U. and she pounds the table that we're louder and more sustainable. As for the scat who asked what's up my ass...???? This is another prime example of knowing who you are, where you've been and where you are headed...? I'm sure the dickies comment seemed as a low blow, but a friend of mine from Texas (gigantic h.s stadiums) made the comment about the espn game and I did some thinking and I saw the core of his comment. So...love it or hate it the sugar is staying in the pantry because I.D.G.A.F. :egriz:

 

[zengriz]

Factoid: Bobcat Stadium is laid out in an atypical NW by SE direction...Alfred Hitchcock would like that.

...a factoid...
...that alwayz...
...puzzled me...

... ...

 

[bozely]

Bozeman State has made IMMENSE improvements at their facility.I'm not trying to take that away from them, but I'm not the one to sugar coat on egriz. A top 5 facility...??? Not even close...google and be just slightly objective. There is nothing wrong with their south bowl as far as visual symmetry and body count. However our "batwings" move the corner crazies closer (triple alliteration... :lol: ) to the field which is paramount. Factor in hellgate canyon, mount sentinel, and the big hole denny dug it's a recipe for decibals. For you simpletons, their elongated, one piece curve takes the fan "AWAY" from the field on the rounded areas. As I've said before my spouse was a season ticket holder a A.S.U. and she pounds the table that we're louder and more sustainable. As for the scat who asked what's up my ass...???? This is another prime example of knowing who you are, where you've been and where you are headed...? I'm sure the dickies comment seemed as a low blow, but a friend of mine from Texas (gigantic h.s stadiums) made the comment about the espn game and I did some thinking and I saw the core of his comment. So...love it or hate it the sugar is staying in the pantry because I.D.G.A.F. :egriz:

But you obviously do "G.A.F.", the length and emotional involvement in your post proves that beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[WyomingGrizFan]

...for a long time, Bobcat Stadium, and before when it was Reno H. Sales, may not have been on par with Wash-Griz or Kidd Brewer, but I for one never thought that it was a sub-par FCS stadium. I have sat in every section of the stadium, with the exception of the newest expansion, and have stood on the field for many games and I have never thought the place was as bad as so many Griz fans always said it was.

It may not have been a "sub-par stadium" but the playing field was but mud during the season - a gooey, crapulous no-nonsense, take-no-prisoners slimy slick type of mud; especially during the various times it was Cat-Griz in Bozoville. That's been the main difference in my book; Bobcat Stadium, or the Litterbox, whichever, finally getting a half way decent playing surface. Before then it was a subpar playing field; much like the parking lot that, supposedly, they're going to be paving this summer, that I've been bitching about for the past thirty years or so.

 

[get'em_griz]

It's about time hat they got that turf... I remember having to march on that in the marching band during 2007 in the marching band. It was so muddy and messy.