5-0 Ags

taylorswift13 said:

---

Aggies win again! Back to back top 10 wins!

---

I had no doubt!

Jayci up 6-5, Mary up 5-2... DARE I SAY IT

6-0

AGGIES SWEEP 2 TOP 10 TEAMS BACK TO BACK

Auburn cat fur on the Mitchell Tennis courts needs to be swept up please and than you

She hits it like crazy, I'd be scared on the other end

Seemed like Makarova was having trouble with her serve and seemed to hit a lot of balls just under the top of the net. But she played through it to win a #2 single. I thought Goldsmith got robbed of a point in Set 2. She returned a ball that she called long right after she hit it but the chair ruled she called it too late, 1 point later the Auburn player won her 5th game.

bigfoot10s said:

---

Aceswimmer09 said:

---

Why on earth no build it next to the tennis center this is dumb

---

Because if they built it on campus, the athletic dept would have to actually foot the bill for it. They've shown they don't want to put any money into the tennis programs.

If someone else builds it, it costs A&M the bare minimum.

---

Hope that's not the case or Ross isn't doing his job very well. Mitchell was a state of the art facility when built and we need the same for an indoor facility.

Like track, a state of the art facility could attract more tennis events as well to BCS.

Agree with this. There needs to be an investment into an indoor facility but I don't believe it needs to be on campus. UNLESS, they can find a way to make it more than just an indoor tennis facility and tie it to more than one program.

Anyway - man - what an exciting time for our women's tennis program. 23-1 with the one loss coming in a 4-3 decision in a tight 3rd set tiebreaker (that I believe we actually won, but whatever. Haha). It would have been nice to match up with North Carolina or OU but if they keep playing like this I see those matchups in the future. Gig'em!

Why can't it be a stand alone facility ? Basically every indoor tennis facility in the nation is just that. Tie it in with REC sports if needed.

Harry Dunne said:

---

Gap said:

---

We need access to a close by indoor facility. We really don't need a standalone indoor facility that sits empty for most of the year. The only way that we would need a stand alone indoor facility on campus is if another isn't available to us nearby. The arrangement with Bryan will work out perfectly assuming that the lease terms are negotiated to give our tennis teams preference when they need it.

Some of that savings can still be invested elsewhere in our tennis program.

---

No one needs anything other than the basics but it puts you at a disadvantage when you're the only school of the entire conference that doesn't have an on-campus indoor facility.

The arrangement with Bryan is better than nothing, but it's still a pain to have to take the teams off-campus to practice indoors and a city facility being constantly used is not going to be or remain as nice as an on-campus dedicated facility.

We have the top tennis budget in the country. We don't need savings "reinvested" in the program. We need facilities that rival those of our competition. We need to put our teams in a position to win national championships. With all of the money that the athletic department has it is truly an embarrassment that they won't follow through on some thing that has been in the works for 20 years now and just build a damn thing next to the outdoor courts.

---

Agreed. Thinking we don't need this is asinine. And thinking it'll sit empty most of the year is also just false.

We don't "need" it right now. It is a nice to have. And if they build one in Bryan (literally 10 minute away if you chose the worst traffic time of any day) that gives our teams priority access when needed for practices and matches that is about as good as it gets. We remain an outdoor tennis team, but now have indoor access right on top of us whenever we chose it.

The city of Bryan can worry about selling memberships and making it financially feasible. A&M Athletics doesn't have to worry about a multi-million $ cash outlay and then selling memberships to others to play there and then catering to them.

The millions can then be spent on something with a significantly higher ROI, yet we still have the access we "need" whenever we want. It is a win-win! Now, if you have a donor lined up that wants to foot the entire bill for this particular project that changes things.

It is a bad ROI project for just the tennis program (not all of athletics) when you have priority usage at one right by campus. Not because of the large outlay of cash, but primarily because the return on the investment is poor given the alternative available is similar without the outlay of cash.

ROI is a financial concept of course. The marginal return of spending millions of your own money on something available nearby is negligible.

Harry Dunne said:

---

Gap said:

---

We don't "need" it right now.

---

Ross, is that you? Why are you being such a cheapskate!?!?

So what you're telling me is that we are the only school in the conference that doesn't need an on-campus indoor facility…and what I'm hearing is that you don't GAF about tennis.

---

How much is "on-campus" worth vs "off-campus"? Are you building 3 courts, 6 courts, 12 courts? Oklahoma's Indoor Facility with 6 courts cost $8.4M in 2009. Are we looking at double that cost today?

Do you plan on selling memberships in the new facility or is it for A&M team only use? Renting it out by the hour to whomever wants to use it?

Harry Dunne said:

---

getting the whole team into vans, loading equipment up, driving over, unloading and then repeating that all over again after

---

Is this supposed to be satire? You do understand that these college students drive cars themselves? They wouldn't load up in vans at the A&M Tennis Center to go to a practice a few minutes away in Bryan.

They live in different places and have classes all over campus. And amazingly, our golf team members drive themselves all the way out to Traditions instead of loading up in a van somewhere on campus to make the drive.

You seem to have a lot of displeasure over this issue but not the ability to engage in a discussion of what something you think is a good idea would look like. You are missing out on all the fun. Oh well.

Yeah, that is not why Joffe left…..

Who cares that he left? We have a great coach now and a great team. Yes we all agree we need an indoor facility. It will happen hopefully sooner rather than later. The best coaches will always find the best athletes.

Isn't that what they are going to do in Bryan?

What does A&M Tennis need there permanently? Some duplicate practice equipment (and a storage room), a basic (secondary) training room, perhaps a lounge. I don't think you need separate men's and women's team locker rooms as this is not your primary space.

Save $10M here allows for $10M to spend elsewhere.

Let's BTHO Bama on senior day! Gig'em