Also, you guys are going to be held to an impossible standard since your programs geographical profile and FCS success is nearly a mirror image of App's. App set a ton of firsts for FCS to FBS transitions including winning %, Bowl Wins, Bowl Win Record, Conference Championships, total wins, etc.

You have some big footprints to walk in.

I know there were a few nuggets that Bourne dropped a few years ago when McFeely, the Fargo beat writer came to town to write about the Dukes.

1. He said that they already have drawings for the second side. Years ago I found some Moseley Architect drawings that were posted online. They do exist.
2. Bourne also said that with a growing alumni based that he could see expansion in FCS under the right trends.

I’m not sure how finishing the horseshoe would impact Godwin but you would think that the incoming Convo renovations (minus the nauditorium and volleyball gym) can move office and locker room space. Assuming that gets on track again, we might have a good foundation for expansion in the SBC. Bourne and King look like they’ve executed very well in hindsight (minus BBall coaches)

I agree that we likely won't do anything on the visitor side for a while. I have wondered if Godwin could be taken down on the pool side and left standing on the old Sinclair Gymnasium side. It's been forever since I was inside that building. Was it constructed as 2 separate, but connected structures?

(10-25-2021 11:36 AM)olddawg Wrote:  I agree that we likely won't do anything on the visitor side for a while. I have wondered if Godwin could be taken down on the pool side and left standing on the old Sinclair Gymnasium side. It's been forever since I was inside that building. Was it constructed as 2 separate, but connected structures?

Level the whole thing and sell it as ultra premium VIP tailgating

All I know is there are going to be a lot of pissed off alumni/donors if our seating is 10,000 short for the first time we host UVa or Tech.

(10-25-2021 11:36 AM)olddawg Wrote:  I agree that we likely won't do anything on the visitor side for a while. I have wondered if Godwin could be taken down on the pool side and left standing on the old Sinclair Gymnasium side. It's been forever since I was inside that building. Was it constructed as 2 separate, but connected structures?

I'm pretty sure it was built as one building. Doesn't mean that they couldn't salvage part of it, but no idea if its worth it.

Regardless, I am sure that the admin already has plans for the visiting side and what they are going to have to do/not do with Godwin to make it happen.
I wouldn't be surprised to see it come down and build something in its place... like a new parking garage perhaps?

(10-25-2021 11:38 AM)JMURocks Wrote:  

(10-25-2021 11:36 AM)olddawg Wrote:  I agree that we likely won't do anything on the visitor side for a while. I have wondered if Godwin could be taken down on the pool side and left standing on the old Sinclair Gymnasium side. It's been forever since I was inside that building. Was it constructed as 2 separate, but connected structures?

Level the whole thing and sell it as ultra premium VIP tailgating

Or if it stays create some cool rooftop viewing ala Wrigley Field.

(10-25-2021 11:40 AM)2Buck Wrote:  All I know is there are going to be a lot of pissed off alumni/donors if our seating is 10,000 short for the first time we host UVa or Tech.

Easy answer - secure season tickets or ante up with big $ to help expand BFS.

There will be tickets, just not enough for casual fans.

(10-25-2021 11:40 AM)2Buck Wrote:  All I know is there are going to be a lot of pissed off alumni/donors if our seating is 10,000 short for the first time we host UVa or Tech.

I'd imagine VPI/UVA schedules are filled pretty far out at this time.

As others have said, we'll need a major (corporate?) donor to come through before we can break ground.

(10-25-2021 10:41 AM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  I dont think we should go with a mirror image of the home stands since i'd be worried we'd have a ton of empty seats. Definitely need to update the away stands and finish the horsehoe on the lower portion. I'd rather a sellout 35k than a 50k stadium with 15k empty seats

Couple comments on this thread.

I thought when we completed the expansion capacity would be 45k,
The visitor side will not need a press box, club, etc meaning relatively speaking it will be cheaper to build. Of course costs have increased since we build the home side, and of course Godwin......

(10-25-2021 11:42 AM)JMad03 Wrote:  

(10-25-2021 11:36 AM)olddawg Wrote:  I agree that we likely won't do anything on the visitor side for a while. I have wondered if Godwin could be taken down on the pool side and left standing on the old Sinclair Gymnasium side. It's been forever since I was inside that building. Was it constructed as 2 separate, but connected structures?

I'm pretty sure it was built as one building. Doesn't mean that they couldn't salvage part of it, but no idea if its worth it.

Regardless, I am sure that the admin already has plans for the visiting side and what they are going to have to do/not do with Godwin to make it happen.
I wouldn't be surprised to see it come down and build something in its place... like a new parking garage perhaps?

Doing this could allow them to slip that part into the budget as a general campus improvement for needed parking. Use it for campus parking on non-gamedays and have it positioned to allow BFS expansion. Make the remainder of the space closest to the stadium as a grassy area or premium tailgate lot.

If they do this right, phase 0 of the next expansion doesn't require much fundraising. You could reduce some of the cost needed for the next phase.

I think I remember hearing that the lower bowl on the visitors side could be built without impacting Godwin. The current visitor stands are set so far back from the field, that by bringing the new stands closer to the field, there's enough room to squeeze them in. I know I heard that at one point years ago, but can't remember where/from whom.

^ that rings a bell for me too..lowe bowl would bring us to 31-32k im guessing? Seems like a good number, and with temporary bleachers on Godwin roof for huge games (good idea stolen from above) we could get another 5k

(10-25-2021 12:08 PM)bcp_jmu Wrote:  ^ that rings a bell for me too..lowe bowl would bring us to 31-32k im guessing? Seems like a good number, and with temporary bleachers on Godwin roof for huge games (good idea stolen from above) we could get another 5k

Temporary bleachers on a roof sounds like something that might run afoul of various regulations. You would need to worry about safety, and evacuation plans, etc. Would be a cool idea if feasible.

My first priority would be to ensure the camera angle and positions are oriented to our new side of the stadium. As it works now, it is like showing the back porch and trash cans all the time. Just the opposite of curb appeal.

The seating should be in our long range plans - 5 to 10 years out for announcement and whatever it takes to phase in the construction. Regular 25k sellouts again, would be fine for the next 10 years and price up premium games. We'll definitely get some teams to visit that travel well, especially in the first few visits - where they can check out the newbie.

(10-25-2021 11:46 AM)JMU2004 Wrote:  

(10-25-2021 11:40 AM)2Buck Wrote:  All I know is there are going to be a lot of pissed off alumni/donors if our seating is 10,000 short for the first time we host UVa or Tech.

I'd imagine VPI/UVA schedules are filled pretty far out at this time.

As others have said, we'll need a major (corporate?) donor to come through before we can break ground.

VT and UVa are supposed to be busy working in PAC12 and Big10 games given the new Alliance arrangement. Unfortunately, the Sun Belt will probably be a lower priority for a while. So, that may not happen for JMU like it did for ODU and Liberty when they moved up, at least for 5 years or so. Hopefully they will set something up right away, even if for later years.

(10-25-2021 12:12 PM)JMU_Rocks! Wrote:  My first priority would be to ensure the camera angle and positions are oriented to our new side of the stadium. As it works now, it is like showing the back porch and trash cans all the time. Just the opposite of curb appeal.

The seating should be in our long range plans - 5 to 10 years out for announcement and whatever it takes to phase in the construction. Regular 25k sellouts again, would be fine for the next 10 years and price up premium games. We'll definitely get some teams to visit that travel well, especially in the first few visits - where they can check out the newbie.

the JMU logo would be upside down if you flipped the camera angle

Maybe build the upper deck into the roof of Godwin-like BC did with their upper deck and their arena, Conte Forum. I do believe Conte was engineered for that combination though.

^

I would hope that would be an easy fix, we're already changing the conference affiliation!

(10-25-2021 12:27 PM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  

(10-25-2021 12:12 PM)JMU_Rocks! Wrote:  My first priority would be to ensure the camera angle and positions are oriented to our new side of the stadium. As it works now, it is like showing the back porch and trash cans all the time. Just the opposite of curb appeal.

The seating should be in our long range plans - 5 to 10 years out for announcement and whatever it takes to phase in the construction. Regular 25k sellouts again, would be fine for the next 10 years and price up premium games. We'll definitely get some teams to visit that travel well, especially in the first few visits - where they can check out the newbie.

the JMU logo would be upside down if you flipped the camera angle

Plus commentators would be viewing the game from the opposite side of what the cameras see, and you wouldn't have as good and high of an angle. The only realistic way to get out of showing our back porch and trash cans all the time is to do the other side of the stadium.