Interesting article about HRS. I am not an architect, but I have worried about our proposed modifications straying from the original vision of the design. Comments?

http://offcite.org/2013/11/26/the-other-...ce-stadium

I worry more that nothing has been announced yet.

I always loved stopping and looking at the schematic drawing for the canopy over Rice Stadium in the trophy case at the RMC. I always thought it would have been one of the most amazing sights to see as part of a football stadium. I don't know how practical it would have been, but definitely awesome.

That's a good article, and the timing of it tells me that plans must be in the final stages.

I like the idea of leveling the south endzone to street-level, but maybe the north endzone should be left alone or benched and covered with tarps. It could be opened for big opponents. The entrance needs to be attractive and inviting. Right now, all you see as you enter the stadium is a concrete wall. It's ugly.

I also really like the idea of a small, "urban forest" surrounding the structure. It could have a really nice jogging trail that could be utilized by everyone in the city.

There are endless possibilities, I just hope they get it right.

(11-27-2013 12:30 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  I also really like the idea of a small, "urban forest" surrounding the structure. It could have a really nice jogging trail that could be utilized by everyone in the city.

But the parking, my God, think about the parking!

[/sarcasm]

I strongly agree with the article about preserving the good aesthetic of the original design. Cutting into the bowl with a building in the endzone would be an abomination. Rice should prize good design. One of the reasons I fear talk of a new stadium is that I am almost certain the new stadium would not be as well-designed as the current one. It would probably be either small and/or cheap-o looking.

Rice Stadium has great 'bones'; it just needs a face-lift. I like the idea of making the endzone terraces grassy areas for picnicking. I suppose the grass would need to be aritificial, but the effect is the same.

I prefer to put the EZF at the NORTH end so that it is close to the field and the practice fields. The amount of precious practice time currently eaten up by the walk from the current locker rooms to the practice field and back, while not a ton on a daily basis, adds up to significant lost opportunity to fine tune things like special teams - things that win ball games for you. So from a practical standpoint, I much prefer a NORTH EZF to anything else I've seen. Second would be and East Side, with locker rooms at the North end, but I'm not sure we are going to go with that big of a building (it would need to stretch 150-160 yards or so to look right centered on the East Side of the stadium, IMHO). That leave North end, abut 80 yards wide, with a new tunnel to get to the field. I think that is more what we need. Further, it is where the electrical is coming in and makes an electrical system upgrade for the entire stadium much easier.

JMHO.

By the way, My instincts, honed from my years of affilliation with Rice, is that the facility will be announced when there is a lull in press coverage of the football team. I am rather hopeful that is not until the break between the conference championship game and the bowl game, when there will be a lull for us even if we win it all and are sitting in the Liberty bowl. What concerns me is that we haven't had any indication that it was on the BOD agenda for the last board meeting. It may have been; I just haven't seen any agenda or indication that it was or was not. I had heard that it was supposed to be.

One of the greatest design elements of Rice Stadium is that it was built as a whole. It has always been big, and it was designed to handle big crowds with the wide concourses, etc. It's wasn't a small stadium that had extra seating and stands tacked on, like the much-uglier facilities at UT and A&M. Rice Stadium is far more functional because of it.

Design Priority #1: make all updates to Rice Stadium look like they belonged there in the first place. It would be terrible if Rice Stadium acquired that tacked-on look and screwed-up functionality.

(11-27-2013 12:46 PM)Bay Area Owl Wrote:  One of the greatest design elements of Rice Stadium is that it was built as a whole. It has always been big, and it was designed to handle big crowds with the wide concourses, etc. It's wasn't a small stadium that had extra seating and stands tacked on, like the much-uglier facilities at UT and A&M. Rice Stadium is far more functional because of it.

Design Priority #1: make all updates to Rice Stadium look like they belonged there in the first place. It would be terrible if Rice Stadium acquired that tacked-on look and screwed-up functionality.

Exactly. Well-stated. This above all else.

I have a feeling we'll see more of the lower seating removed. The seating that's left will be chairbacked and will be really nice. They need to find a way to get more bodies in the upper decks. The view is incredible and the concourses could all be beautified and upgraded.

I love HRS. It needs upgrades, but I like the basic design.

I love the fact that HRS is currently too big for our crowds. Sure, half-empty stands don't look great on TV, but HRS's size is a monument to our football history and (should be) a statement about our goals for the future. It's a big-time stadium! If we replaced it, the replacement stadium would not be of the same scale. It would be sized for a small school with relatively small crowds. It would be a small-time stadium! To build a 70,000-seat stadium for Rice today would take a breathtaking amount of nerve and boldness. Who would build a 70,000-seat stadium for one of the smallest schools in Division I? Only someone with unconventional optimism, a fierce love of Rice, and a lot of courage. There's spirit and defiance in keeping up a 70,000-seat stadium for a school with 6,500 students! It is a statement against those who call us "mid-major" and otherwise try to label us as inferior or less-deserving. No, we are not inferior. Maybe we've struggled to have success on the scoreboard, but we graduate our football players, we prepare them for success after graduation, we compete with integrity, and we never quit--and we've been doing that at the highest level for generations. "BCS" schools ought to be modeling themselves after us instead of sacrificing their integrity and academic standards in pursuit of TV dollars. The size of HRS says that we'll play our own game and respect our own history. We won't be conventional as "BCS" schools define it. The size of HRS is a big middle finger directed at those who say we should conform to a broken system.

I think our current capacity is 47k, not 72k. An article in the Bleacher Report discusses the option of further reductions:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/28240...university

As many of you know, Tulane is going that route with its' new on campus stadium.

Great post Caelligh. HRS still has capacity for 70,000, but with the tarps it's 47k. It's definitely an asset. If we played in an off campus stadium or a small-time on campus one, it would be a downgrade.

great post calliegh. Love giving the middle finger to the Man.

That Bleacher Report article was mostly inaccurate and terrible. We average 10,000-15,000 and have not put more than 21,000 since the NFL came to town??!! What a hack.

The one thing he said that was mildly intriguing was some large owl statues standing watch over the stadium. That actually sounds pretty cool. Without cutting the edges off the upper decks. That elegant curve (to borrow a phrase from Mr. McGinty) is a defining element of the stadium.

(11-27-2013 12:33 PM)Middle Ages Wrote:  

(11-27-2013 12:30 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  I also really like the idea of a small, "urban forest" surrounding the structure. It could have a really nice jogging trail that could be utilized by everyone in the city.

But the parking, my God, think about the parking! [/sarcasm]

We've already lost almost 1000 parking spots to the new tennis facility and the continuing ed building. Parking needs to be an integral part of any facilities plan.

(11-27-2013 01:25 PM)Caelligh Wrote:  HRS's size is a monument to our football history and (should be) a statement about our goals for the future. It's a big-time stadium! If we replaced it, the replacement stadium would not be of the same scale. It would be sized for a small school with relatively small crowds. It would be a small-time stadium! To build a 70,000-seat stadium for Rice today would take a breathtaking amount of nerve and boldness. Who would build a 70,000-seat stadium for one of the smallest schools in Division I? Only someone with unconventional optimism, a fierce love of Rice, and a lot of courage. There's spirit and defiance in keeping up a 70,000-seat stadium for a school with 6,500 students! It is a statement against those who call us "mid-major" and otherwise try to label us as inferior or less-deserving. No, we are not inferior. Maybe we've struggled to have success on the scoreboard, but we graduate our football players, we prepare them for success after graduation, we compete with integrity, and we never quit--and we've been doing that at the highest level for generations. "BCS" schools ought to be modeling themselves after us instead of sacrificing their integrity and academic standards in pursuit of TV dollars. The size of HRS says that we'll play our own game and respect our own history. We won't be conventional as "BCS" schools define it. The size of HRS is a big middle finger directed at those who say we should conform to a broken system.

I freaking LOVE this Caelligh!!! Wonderful post.

(11-27-2013 01:49 PM)Middle Ages Wrote:  The one thing he said that was mildly intriguing was some large owl statues standing watch over the stadium. That actually sounds pretty cool.

Or, you know, giant middle finger statues...



Wish I could find a giant-owl-giving-the-finger statue. Can we commission one of those?

(11-27-2013 01:25 PM)Caelligh Wrote:  I love HRS. It needs upgrades, but I like the basic design.

I love the fact that HRS is currently too big for our crowds. Sure, half-empty stands don't look great on TV, but HRS's size is a monument to our football history and (should be) a statement about our goals for the future. It's a big-time stadium! If we replaced it, the replacement stadium would not be of the same scale. It would be sized for a small school with relatively small crowds. It would be a small-time stadium! To build a 70,000-seat stadium for Rice today would take a breathtaking amount of nerve and boldness. Who would build a 70,000-seat stadium for one of the smallest schools in Division I? Only someone with unconventional optimism, a fierce love of Rice, and a lot of courage. There's spirit and defiance in keeping up a 70,000-seat stadium for a school with 6,500 students! It is a statement against those who call us "mid-major" and otherwise try to label us as inferior or less-deserving. No, we are not inferior. Maybe we've struggled to have success on the scoreboard, but we graduate our football players, we prepare them for success after graduation, we compete with integrity, and we never quit--and we've been doing that at the highest level for generations. "BCS" schools ought to be modeling themselves after us instead of sacrificing their integrity and academic standards in pursuit of TV dollars. The size of HRS says that we'll play our own game and respect our own history. We won't be conventional as "BCS" schools define it. The size of HRS is a big middle finger directed at those who say we should conform to a broken system.

Love it. Great stuff. Never have quite heard it expressed this way before. Great stuff.

(11-27-2013 04:12 PM)Ricefootballnet Wrote:  

(11-27-2013 01:25 PM)Caelligh Wrote:  I love HRS. It needs upgrades, but I like the basic design.

I love the fact that HRS is currently too big for our crowds. Sure, half-empty stands don't look great on TV, but HRS's size is a monument to our football history and (should be) a statement about our goals for the future. It's a big-time stadium! If we replaced it, the replacement stadium would not be of the same scale. It would be sized for a small school with relatively small crowds. It would be a small-time stadium! To build a 70,000-seat stadium for Rice today would take a breathtaking amount of nerve and boldness. Who would build a 70,000-seat stadium for one of the smallest schools in Division I? Only someone with unconventional optimism, a fierce love of Rice, and a lot of courage. There's spirit and defiance in keeping up a 70,000-seat stadium for a school with 6,500 students! It is a statement against those who call us "mid-major" and otherwise try to label us as inferior or less-deserving. No, we are not inferior. Maybe we've struggled to have success on the scoreboard, but we graduate our football players, we prepare them for success after graduation, we compete with integrity, and we never quit--and we've been doing that at the highest level for generations. "BCS" schools ought to be modeling themselves after us instead of sacrificing their integrity and academic standards in pursuit of TV dollars. The size of HRS says that we'll play our own game and respect our own history. We won't be conventional as "BCS" schools define it. The size of HRS is a big middle finger directed at those who say we should conform to a broken system.

Love it. Great stuff. Never have quite heard it expressed this way before. Great stuff.

I admire the sentiments as well, but having a big stadium with empty seats falling down around us will send another message. If we're going to keep it, we need to maintain and update it.

(11-27-2013 01:25 PM)Caelligh Wrote:  I love HRS. It needs upgrades, but I like the basic design.

I love the fact that HRS is currently too big for our crowds. Sure, half-empty stands don't look great on TV, but HRS's size is a monument to our football history and (should be) a statement about our goals for the future. It's a big-time stadium! If we replaced it, the replacement stadium would not be of the same scale. It would be sized for a small school with relatively small crowds. It would be a small-time stadium! To build a 70,000-seat stadium for Rice today would take a breathtaking amount of nerve and boldness. Who would build a 70,000-seat stadium for one of the smallest schools in Division I? Only someone with unconventional optimism, a fierce love of Rice, and a lot of courage. There's spirit and defiance in keeping up a 70,000-seat stadium for a school with 6,500 students! It is a statement against those who call us "mid-major" and otherwise try to label us as inferior or less-deserving. No, we are not inferior. Maybe we've struggled to have success on the scoreboard, but we graduate our football players, we prepare them for success after graduation, we compete with integrity, and we never quit--and we've been doing that at the highest level for generations. "BCS" schools ought to be modeling themselves after us instead of sacrificing their integrity and academic standards in pursuit of TV dollars. The size of HRS says that we'll play our own game and respect our own history. We won't be conventional as "BCS" schools define it. The size of HRS is a big middle finger directed at those who say we should conform to a broken system.

Inspiring! Caelligh, and why aren't you coming in for the Tulane game?

I took a look at the new UH Stadium a couple of weeks ago and wasn't impressed. It looks "Rinky Dink."

The Brick and Concrete of HRS makes a statement.