After the trees won out they decided to put it on the existing practice fields.



http://www.vtnews.vt.edu/articles/2014/0...rview.html

Sweeeeeeeeet!!!

It has a lot more architectural appeal than other indoor practice facilities I've seen.

I'm not too big on the whole practice facility thing but that certainly looks nice. I'm sure it will prove to be a fine addition to that already gorgeous campus.

A very fine looking facility.

I thought the fight over the trees was stupid. However, I applaud VT for having decent architectural taste.

An actual release about it today withe more pictures:

http://www.hokiesports.com/indoorpracticefacility/

Wow! That looks really, really nice. Now if only we could get something like that...

So I guess you're going the Michigan route with your IPF.

(03-27-2014 09:44 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  So I guess you're going the Michigan route with your IPF.

I'm not sure what you mean by that but here are some pictures of other IPFs around college football:

http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/2013/co...acilities/

Very nice. Classic architecture.

I never thought the tree debate was silly. I thought not being able to find a compromise to save some of the older trees was silly.

(03-27-2014 10:41 AM)Wolfman Wrote:  Very nice. Classic architecture.

I never thought the tree debate was silly. I thought not being able to find a compromise to save some of the older trees was silly.

Yeah save what you can because it takes an extremely long time for them to come back. ECU lost something like 15-17 old oak trees in hurricane Irene. It sucks in my opinion and I'm not even a big tree enthusiast.

I think the one on the far right of this pic was knocked over.

Two 50 yard outdoor practice fields shouldn't be a problem with VT's offensive playbook.

(03-27-2014 10:38 AM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(03-27-2014 09:44 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  So I guess you're going the Michigan route with your IPF.

I'm not sure what you mean by that but here are some pictures of other IPFs around college football:

http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/2013/co...acilities/

Double high roof. Super glass-y. Extra expensive.

(03-27-2014 10:10 PM)ACCslater Wrote:  Two 50 yard outdoor practice fields shouldn't be a problem with VT's offensive playbook.

Ba-zinga!

(03-27-2014 10:27 PM)Marge Schott Wrote:  

(03-27-2014 10:38 AM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(03-27-2014 09:44 AM)Marge Schott Wrote:  So I guess you're going the Michigan route with your IPF.

I'm not sure what you mean by that but here are some pictures of other IPFs around college football:

http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/2013/co...acilities/

Double high roof. Super glass-y. Extra expensive.

Putting it on the practice field was much more expensive due to the underground infrastructure they'd have to move. It'd been a lot cheaper to bulldoze a section of forest.

The current location means it'll end up on television a lot so it needs to look good. We couldn't just put up a generic shell building there. It'll be used for fanfest and fundraising functions before games since it's right next to the stadium entrance. It's useful having it right beside the new locker rooms and training rooms. Then you have the gameday field connected through the tunnel so it can serve as a full-sized outdoor practice field when needed.

The expense I refer to has nothing to do with underground infrastructure. It is over-the-top aesthetically, like Michigan is, imo. I haven't read the links provided but if it's under $20M I'll be shocked. And if it is, it won't look identical to the renderings shown.