- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Apparent Shift in Tiger Stadium Expansion Design
Posted on 1/19/14 at 11:28 pm to johnfredlsu
Posted on 1/19/14 at 11:28 pm to johnfredlsu
Just wait til they put brown bars over most of the windows. They won't cover all of them though. That would just be tacky.
1
Posted on 1/20/14 at 7:02 am to T
quote:
Just wait til they put brown bars over most of the windows
Looks so bad
Posted on 1/20/14 at 7:48 am to johnfredlsu
The fans' vision of having the SEZ expansion look like the rest of the stadium (From the inside) won't happen. No one likes the space between the seats in the corners.
Everyone wants the continuation of the WUD and EUD to be seemless in the SEZ and look as one. It would look more imposing, that way. Now it looks like an NFL stadium where money drives everything. The adds are fine, but the Arkansas-OkState box seat look is a little dissapointing.
Won't happen. Never was going to happen.
One of the "fan goals" was to get attendance over 100000, it looks like that will happen.
For those complaining about how the extra will be empty, get over it. For the big games that will be on tv, the tickets will be sold out....for sure.
Everyone wants the continuation of the WUD and EUD to be seemless in the SEZ and look as one. It would look more imposing, that way. Now it looks like an NFL stadium where money drives everything. The adds are fine, but the Arkansas-OkState box seat look is a little dissapointing.
Won't happen. Never was going to happen.
One of the "fan goals" was to get attendance over 100000, it looks like that will happen.
For those complaining about how the extra will be empty, get over it. For the big games that will be on tv, the tickets will be sold out....for sure.
This post was edited on 1/20/14 at 7:51 am
Posted on 1/20/14 at 9:33 am to ApexTiger
I love all the armchair Architects in this thread.
Posted on 1/20/14 at 9:36 am to CarRamrod
If Kanye can be an architect I dont see why a bunch of guys on the Rant cant be.
Posted on 1/20/14 at 9:47 am to TigerattheU
Posted on 1/20/14 at 9:52 am to Geaux Tahel
Posted on 1/20/14 at 11:10 am to johnfredlsu
quote:
Any visionary architect worth his/her salt (and worth the money paid in the case) would not have stretched and shuffled design elements in a way that is an insult to the original.
I'm frustrated that no one in the athletic department slowed down the expansion until a proper design could be put together.
Man. Get over yourself.
It'll be OK.
Also: Perhaps the end result is the product of too much meddling by non-architects (like on this board).
Or perhaps it is just perfect, but somehow not your cup of tea.
Posted on 1/20/14 at 11:26 am to johnfredlsu
quote:
Unlike plenty of respectable folks on here (who are certainly entitled to their opinions), I appreciate the west side addition as a modern and rather imposing structure. It may not be your taste but it does not fall into the trap of being a cheap copy. If it weren't for the ramps, the west deck would stand above the original stadium, giving onlookers a full view of the original structure.
The south end zone--as evidenced by the changing renderings--attempts to use the north end zone as a model but really just shifts pieces around and stretches them until the final product is out of proportion. If form follows function in design, then it appears from the renderings that the form was decided (based on the north, fine) and then stretched so that the upper deck could function in the ways that it needs to. Any visionary architect worth his/her salt (and worth the money paid in the case) would not have stretched and shuffled design elements in a way that is an insult to the original.
A lot of stadiums these days have a certain "Disneyfication" (for lack of a better term) factor in their design. A lot of faux architectural elements and such.
One of the things I've always liked about Tiger Stadium was, you could never really say that about it.
However, there appears to be a definite Disneyfication to this South Endzone expansion, especially with regard to this contrived looking exterior.
Posted on 1/20/14 at 11:44 am to Sid in Lakeshore
quote:
Man. Get over yourself.
quote:
I love all the armchair Architects in this thread.
quote:
If Kanye can be an architect I dont see why a bunch of guys on the Rant cant be.
I'm quite accustomed to threads on here devolving into personal insults and attacks. However, this really doesn't do much but muddle the issue being discussed.
If $80 million dollars are being spent on a structure that is shown on televisions throughout the country as a symbol of my alma mater, then I think it is worthwhile to critique and show concern about the decisions that are made. Granted, this forum may not be the place to get an idea heard by the administration. But I did hope, as I stated in my original post, that there might be a knowledgeable party here who could speak to the reason why the design turned out the way it did.
I guess the noise on the thread at least ensures that it's continually bumped. So, in light of that, thanks to the individuals who used this thread as a space to insult other people. Maybe someone who has some knowledge about the design will eventually see it and respond.
This post was edited on 1/20/14 at 11:47 am
Posted on 1/20/14 at 11:59 am to johnfredlsu
quote:
thanks to the individuals who used this thread as a space to insult other people.
Thanks, I guess.
IMHO, the most likely difference in the two renderings is that the first set is initial renderings done solely based on original artists/architects conception of the project. The second set are probably re-worked renderings after meeting with the LSU AD and the absolute requirements in regards to square footage/finishes/costs, etc. are finalized. As any design unfolded, trade-offs are made.
It is easy to arm-chair QB, it is something else entirely to actually design the thing.
OMG! A drain is visible!!! how could the architects do that? I would guess the proposed fix for that was nixed by the financiers due to $.
OMG! The Arches are too high! Well, in the architects view they would likely not be noticed at a lower elevation which would be hidden underneath the catilevered section of luxury boxes or the commercial kitchen.
Point is, neither you not I KNOW why the design is how it is, yet you feel comfortable shitting on the Architect and the AD.
Again. Get over yourself
TL/DR?
Posted on 1/20/14 at 12:06 pm to Sid in Lakeshore
For the non-construction/architecture people here:
An Architectural rendering is usually just the first artistic attempt at what the construction would look like. It gives the Owner something easy to visualize the final product.
Sometimes the construction is feasible, sometimes structurally or due to the cost impact of the design, it is not feasible to match the construction with the rendering. I my many years in construction, it is very rare that the rendering and the final look of the construction match perfectly as something either changes for necessity or for preference.
I
An Architectural rendering is usually just the first artistic attempt at what the construction would look like. It gives the Owner something easy to visualize the final product.
Sometimes the construction is feasible, sometimes structurally or due to the cost impact of the design, it is not feasible to match the construction with the rendering. I my many years in construction, it is very rare that the rendering and the final look of the construction match perfectly as something either changes for necessity or for preference.
I
Posted on 1/20/14 at 12:16 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
A lot of stadiums these days have a certain "Disneyfication" (for lack of a better term) factor in their design. A lot of faux architectural elements and such.
One of the things I've always liked about Tiger Stadium was, you could never really say that about it.
However, there appears to be a definite Disneyfication to this South Endzone expansion, especially with regard to this contrived looking exterior.
I'd agree with that...and one of the first times we saw this was across the street when they decided to stick a metal, frozen in place flag atop Mike's cage rather than a real, working flagpole that could be replaced with a new flag every so often.
I guess I'm still in the minority of LSU fans who was never a fan of the original concept designs for this new addition in the first place. I get what they are trying to do, but at this point it was a lost cause in my mind. Had there ever been any plan at all in place for this full expansion a decade plus ago, then these three builds (the EU, WU and now SUD) would match each other in more ways than all three being constructed out of concrete. Why back in the late 90's when there was first talk of the EU were there not discussion about attempting to extend the Colosseum look of the old bowl out onto what would/could eventually be a wrap around structure encompassing the EU, WU and SUD? Instead, we got what a straight up utilitarian deck on the EU (in terms of design) an WU that looks nothing at all like the original bowl, and barely anything like the EU, and when they decide to "join" the two they do so in a sad attempt to mirror the inner bowl. with with arches that look almost nothing like the original.
Just ugh...
But, nothing to do now...that water has been long gone under the bridge since Dinardo was here and this all started. I'm happy as a clam with what the stadium will look like from the inside, and can't wait to see it cover my view of the horizon from my seats in the north end of the EU. Do I wish they'd have had a better, more cohesive plan way back when to add these seats AND mirror the original design of the bowl? Hell yeah. But it's not going to ruin my experience of going to Tiger Stadium.
Posted on 1/20/14 at 12:32 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
One of the things I've always liked about Tiger Stadium was, you could never really say that about it
you liked the fact that we just didn't give 2 shits about what our stadium looked like and added upper decks that look like 1980's office buildings front eh outside?
I mean i think its wants inside that really counts, but it would be nice if our stadium looked like 1 stadium and not a hodge lodge of buildings.
Posted on 1/20/14 at 1:04 pm to johnfredlsu
quote:
I'm quite accustomed to threads on here devolving into personal insults and attacks. However, this really doesn't do much but muddle the issue being discussed.
If $80 million dollars are being spent on a structure that is shown on televisions throughout the country as a symbol of my alma mater, then I think it is worthwhile to critique and show concern about the decisions that are made. Granted, this forum may not be the place to get an idea heard by the administration. But I did hope, as I stated in my original post, that there might be a knowledgeable party here who could speak to the reason why the design turned out the way it did.
I guess the noise on the thread at least ensures that it's continually bumped. So, in light of that, thanks to the individuals who used this thread as a space to insult other people. Maybe someone who has some knowledge about the design will eventually see it and respond.
your panties are in a wad. Posted on 1/20/14 at 1:10 pm to TIGERSby10
quote:
An Architectural rendering is usually just the first artistic attempt at what the construction would look like. It gives the Owner something easy to visualize the final product.
Sometimes the construction is feasible, sometimes structurally or due to the cost impact of the design, it is not feasible to match the construction with the rendering. I my many years in construction, it is very rare that the rendering and the final look of the construction match perfectly as something either changes for necessity or for preference.
This makes a lot of sense. Truly. I would expect some changes, for sure. I just don't think the changes should distort the original proportions such that the result is so strange to look at. In this case, when so many changes were necessary to make things fit inside, why not go with the look of the West Upper Deck instead?
quote:
OMG! The Arches are too high! Well, in the architects view they would likely not be noticed at a lower elevation which would be hidden underneath the catilevered section of luxury boxes or the commercial kitchen.
This does not make sense to me. But when you couch your ideas in sarcasm I'm not really inclined to want to know what you meant. Thanks for continuing to troll this thread, though.
quote:
Point is, neither you not I KNOW why the design is how it is, yet you feel comfortable shitting on the Architect and the AD.
I do feel comfortable speaking up and raising questions as an alumnus and supporter of the university, yes. I'm frustrated that such a large sum of money would be spent on an ill-planned design.
Posted on 1/20/14 at 1:12 pm to CarRamrod
quote:
your panties are in a wad.
Yup. You've got me figured out. I'll help you out and post this about myself, too. It's coming, I'm sure.
My jimmies are rustled!
Posted on 1/20/14 at 1:43 pm to GeauxTigerTM
quote:
Why back in the late 90's when there was first talk of the EU were there not discussion about attempting to extend the Colosseum look of the old bowl out onto what would/could eventually be a wrap around structure encompassing the EU, WU and SUD?
It's not too late for a coherent, cohesive look to be applied all around the stadium.
Posted on 1/20/14 at 1:56 pm to johnfredlsu
quote:stop being a vagina.
My jimmies are rustled!
This post was edited on 1/20/14 at 3:16 pm
Posted on 1/21/14 at 8:05 am to vl100butch
quote:
the newer rendering and the actual construction, you can only see one of the concrete pilings
You do realize that isn't a photo of actual construction, right?
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News