- 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: Renderings of expansion from LSU
Posted on 4/19/12 at 8:29 am to johnfredlsu
Posted on 4/19/12 at 8:29 am to johnfredlsu
quote:
The two images you've juxtaposed actually look nothing alike. Which is the problem. One is an imitation with proportions that are entirely off. It's not that I wouldn't want something that mirrors the north--it's that I DO want something that mirrors it. The renderings show that someone has taken that mirror and warped it, stretched it to fit a larger area without considering how the stretches and extensions conflict with the original inspiration.
finally, someone who gets it...
0
Posted on 4/19/12 at 8:34 am to bbap
You people will bitch about anything. It is 1000 times better than what we have now for the south endzone. The new design has a more efficient use of windows and better viewing from the inside out. I agree they could have done a better job aesthetically with the upper deck expansions in the past, but whats done is done. I like that they tried to adhere to the north endzone theme but modernized it to that it is more functional. The tiny windows on the north endzone would not be feasible for anything other than dorm rooms...
Posted on 4/19/12 at 8:37 am to Tiger Authority
quote:
used a graphic design program connected to your architecture home building job or whatever you do
I think he used google sketch-up. It's a free program that just about anyone can use without much building knowledge.
Posted on 4/19/12 at 8:39 am to Houston Texas Tiger
yeah it looks great. of course it's not to the tee of the NEZ but who gives a shite. it looks great. some people cant be pleased.
Posted on 4/19/12 at 8:44 am to bbap
hopefully our football program never gets back to the mid-90's level or else were going to have one hell of a lot of empty seats
This post was edited on 4/19/12 at 8:45 am
Posted on 4/19/12 at 9:04 am to Ford Frenzy
I'm not going to get all hung up on the expansion. The main thing is that it is finished by the 2014 season. Certainly Tiger Stadium will be more imposing with the encirclement of the SEZ.
I really don't recruits really are going to study the architectural aspects of the SEZ exterior and how it matches with the NEZ. But making the "Valley" even deeper and more imposing will certainly leave their mark, especially as it will enhance the level of noise.
In that respect, I think one thing still is missing in this puzzle. It is going to be very difficult for fans sitting on the east and west sides close to the SEZ to see the new jumbotrons.
Why not complete this renovation with the biggest and baddest jumbotron in the SEC wrapping totally around the NEZ? The current scoreboard there is due for an update anyway. You want to impress recruits? That's a "wow" factor, not the round circles above the arches. At least at a minimum put matching jumbotrons on the corners of the NEZ. Jumbotrons are low cost compared to anything else.
PS: while we're at it, what would really be eye-popping would be some high intensity lighting illuminating the exterior of the stadium and night sky above it. Would make Tiger Stadium look like Oz walking up. Again, it all about the shock and awe with recruits.
I really don't recruits really are going to study the architectural aspects of the SEZ exterior and how it matches with the NEZ. But making the "Valley" even deeper and more imposing will certainly leave their mark, especially as it will enhance the level of noise.
In that respect, I think one thing still is missing in this puzzle. It is going to be very difficult for fans sitting on the east and west sides close to the SEZ to see the new jumbotrons.
Why not complete this renovation with the biggest and baddest jumbotron in the SEC wrapping totally around the NEZ? The current scoreboard there is due for an update anyway. You want to impress recruits? That's a "wow" factor, not the round circles above the arches. At least at a minimum put matching jumbotrons on the corners of the NEZ. Jumbotrons are low cost compared to anything else.
PS: while we're at it, what would really be eye-popping would be some high intensity lighting illuminating the exterior of the stadium and night sky above it. Would make Tiger Stadium look like Oz walking up. Again, it all about the shock and awe with recruits.
Posted on 4/19/12 at 9:30 am to MetTiger
The correct idea for the exterior is there, but in the official renderings they didn't execute it well at all.
The difference with the north's exterior is that it is shorter in height than the south expansion renderings (thus it looks stretched out and a bit off). They need to have the arches at a shorter height if they want to duplicate the north endzone in the new extension, then figure out a way to build the new upper deck on top of the "colosseum"portion.
The difference with the north's exterior is that it is shorter in height than the south expansion renderings (thus it looks stretched out and a bit off). They need to have the arches at a shorter height if they want to duplicate the north endzone in the new extension, then figure out a way to build the new upper deck on top of the "colosseum"portion.
This post was edited on 4/19/12 at 9:32 am
Posted on 4/19/12 at 9:34 am to MetTiger
quote:
Why not complete this renovation with the biggest and baddest jumbotron in the SEC wrapping totally around the NEZ? The current scoreboard there is due for an update anyway.
They just replaced that scoreboard 3 years ago. They just need to take the ads off.
Posted on 4/19/12 at 9:35 am to bbap
quote:
My quote (out of context):
The two images you've juxtaposed actually look nothing alike. Which is the problem.
Your quote:
They look a lot alike. They dont have to be 100% alike. It looks great.
You didn't read. The quote you posted is only part of what I said. (I didn't know Newt Gingrich was on this board. Kidding.)
Here's the rest of what I said: [The new design] is an imitation with proportions that are entirely off. It's not that I wouldn't want something that mirrors the north--it's that I DO want something that mirrors it. The renderings show that someone has taken that mirror and warped it, stretched it to fit a larger area without considering how the stretches and extensions conflict with the original inspiration.
Taking the original and stretching it to the point that it doesn't work is a problem. I'll reiterate, I appreciate the homage the architect tried to pay to the original. But it hasn't been done in a way that works. I'm just hoping the deficiencies with the design as it stands can be addressed.
There are plenty of people that post on here with silly complaints. I'm not one of them.
There are also plenty of buildings on campus that fail to capture the beauty of the original. I'm just afraid this will be yet another example.
Posted on 4/19/12 at 9:36 am to MaravichManiac
quote:
The correct idea for the exterior is there, but in the official renderings they didn't execute it well at all.
The difference with the north's exterior is that it is shorter in height than the south expansion renderings (thus it looks stretched out and a bit off). They need to have the arches at a shorter height if they want to duplicate the north endzone in the new extension, then figure out a way to build the new upper deck on top of the "colosseum"portion.
^This
Posted on 4/19/12 at 9:46 am to MetTiger
quote:
I really don't recruits really are going to study the architectural aspects of the SEZ exterior and how it matches with the NEZ. But making the "Valley" even deeper and more imposing will certainly leave their mark, especially as it will enhance the level of noise.
Agreed. I'm pretty concerned the aesthetics of Tiger Stadium, rather than what happens inside of it, will really turn off some top-level recruits and LSU and its 100,000 seat stadium will begin a downslide.
Posted on 4/19/12 at 9:50 am to MaravichManiac
quote:
The correct idea for the exterior is there, but in the official renderings they didn't execute it well at all.
Well, it's just renderings.
quote:
The difference with the north's exterior is that it is shorter in height than the south expansion renderings (thus it looks stretched out and a bit off). They need to have the arches at a shorter height if they want to duplicate the north endzone in the new extension, then figure out a way to build the new upper deck on top of the "colosseum"portion.
Not possible. The SEZ already has enough weight as is technically has an upperdeck on top of the original stadium already. This new addition has to stand alone as far as support structures go. And of course it's going to taller than the NEZ as that side won't have an upper deck. There's no way to scale the new SEZ to the NEZ and just throw an upper deck up there.
Posted on 4/19/12 at 9:52 am to Joe Joe Joe
quote:
Agreed. I'm pretty concerned the aesthetics of Tiger Stadium, rather than what happens inside of it, will really turn off some top-level recruits and LSU and its 100,000 seat stadium will begin a downslide.
Cool. Then no need to post about this. It's not an either/or situation. I can care about the product on the field of competition AND the fact that $100 million will be spent to transform the physical space of my alma mater for decades to come. If the recruits are your only concern, then stick to the recruiting board. No big deal.
Posted on 4/19/12 at 9:58 am to Joe Joe Joe
quote:
Agreed. I'm pretty concerned the aesthetics of Tiger Stadium, rather than what happens inside of it, will really turn off some top-level recruits and LSU and its 100,000 seat stadium will begin a downslide.
wtf
Posted on 4/19/12 at 9:59 am to LSUdm21
quote:
They just replaced that scoreboard 3 years ago. They just need to take the ads off.
Agree about the ads. But 3 years in scoreboard/jumbotron technology is ancient times. Anyway, on the jumbotrons, ads are virtual anyway. Gives the department more flexibility to time ads to times/situations in the game. Who looks at the scoreboard at halftime anyway? The scoreboard in Philly for the Eagles comes to mind. Incredibly awesome.
One byproduct of the new SEZ and potential new NEZ jumbotrons is the reduction in swirling winds, which if we go to a pro type passing offense eventually, can't hurt (also counts for kicking).
This post was edited on 4/19/12 at 10:00 am
Posted on 4/19/12 at 10:00 am to johnfredlsu
quote:
Cool. Then no need to post about this. It's not an either/or situation. I can care about the product on the field of competition AND the fact that $100 million will be spent to transform the physical space of my alma mater for decades to come. If the recruits are your only concern, then stick to the recruiting board. No big deal.
Wow, really missed the sarcasm there apparently. That's my fault. Sorry.
I personally like the design. I'm most excited about the fact that LSU is expanding the stadium and making a commitment to improve its facilities. But I'm also not going to get my panties in a wad about a "rendering" that hasn't reached the final approval stage. I'd imagine many of these concerns will be address.
Honestly, people like to bitch and complain about how bad LSU's taste and renovations are, but everything they've done under Alleva fits very well aesthetically with the rest of the university. Hell, he was the driving force behind the window replacements and the North End Zone stuff which, as far as I can tell, has been well received. So it might not be an either/or situation, but I also don't think it warrants the amount of "chicken little-ness" that some posters -- not you, but others -- have expressed.
This post was edited on 4/19/12 at 10:15 am
Posted on 4/19/12 at 10:02 am to johnfredlsu
quote:
The two images you've juxtaposed actually look nothing alike. Which is the problem. One is an imitation with proportions that are entirely off. It's not that I wouldn't want something that mirrors the north--it's that I DO want something that mirrors it. The renderings show that someone has taken that mirror and warped it, stretched it to fit a larger area without considering how the stretches and extensions conflict with the original inspiration.
It is not as if you can see them both at the same time anyway. Is someone going to walk from the North endzone around to the South endzone and complain that the proportions are off? Some people will complain about everything. Good is never good enough.
This post was edited on 4/19/12 at 10:04 am
Posted on 4/19/12 at 10:05 am to spslayto
quote:
Is someone going to walk from the North endzone around to the South endzone and complain that the proportions are off.
I'm a building nerd so I would notice but I wouldn't care either. Even though I like symmetry the aesthetics are there. Another thing that I haven't seen mentioned, is that form follows function.
Posted on 4/19/12 at 10:08 am to junkfunky
quote:
I'm a building nerd so I would notice
Yeah, it takes a real "building nerd" to tell that a side with an upper deck is proportionally different from a side without an upper deck.
Posted on 4/19/12 at 10:12 am to Joe Joe Joe
This thread is getting a little heated. I think there was some sarcasm from a poster that was meant to just say the architecture has nothing to do with the on field product.
I want it to look as good as possible, but ultimately from a business standpoint, it's got to be economically viable. You could do a lot worse - no one wants a monstrosity of course.
Everyone seems to agree on the inside, it's a winner. That was my focus, on game days, the stadium will be more imposing for recruits because of the increased valley-effect and the increased noise level.
Better recruits = Better commits = More wins = More noise = Happy Fans
I think all the guys on here were saying was that while the exterior is very important, what goes on inside is what counts in the end. Looking at any stadium (even the most architecturally significant ones) - not on game day - is kind of "meh". Unless you are an architect.....
I want it to look as good as possible, but ultimately from a business standpoint, it's got to be economically viable. You could do a lot worse - no one wants a monstrosity of course.
Everyone seems to agree on the inside, it's a winner. That was my focus, on game days, the stadium will be more imposing for recruits because of the increased valley-effect and the increased noise level.
Better recruits = Better commits = More wins = More noise = Happy Fans
I think all the guys on here were saying was that while the exterior is very important, what goes on inside is what counts in the end. Looking at any stadium (even the most architecturally significant ones) - not on game day - is kind of "meh". Unless you are an architect.....
This post was edited on 4/19/12 at 10:14 am
Page 8 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News