Lets get something straight. Neyland has been beautifully renovated on the inside... but it remains one of the ugliest (if not THE ugliest) stadiums of any of the major programs. Even A&M's tackle box is nicer on the outside. Stop trying to convinve people that it is a grogeous stadium. It isn't.

quote:

---

SRFL, the discussion is mostly about how the stadium looks from the outside, and right now and until there is a facade Neyland is one of, if not THE ugliest stadiums from the outside. looks good on the inside and good atmosphere. Those pics of all the renovations are very nice.

---

They have a third stage starting very soon that addresses the facade. All brick and glass. They will also upgrade the AV inside the stadium. Not a UT fan or sympathizer just trying to say this isn't our granddaddies Neyland anymore (which was butt ugly). It's a destination now for sure.

I LOVE Kyle Field, LOVE it, but you have to admit, it isn't much to look at on the outside, and the erector set H.S. bleachers on one end and the unconnected other than first deck zone on the other, combined with old stained concrete everywhere and the new maroon ribbons on student side already looking like they were installed by Sully himself, it isn't exactly the best looking thing inside either. I will say given how vertical it is, it does look impressive from the field, especially at night with the lights on.

Not to mention full of students sawing horns off. That is unique.

Check out pages 9-11 of this PDF. It shows the facade that they're looking to add to Neyland.

http://www.utsports.com/facilities/08_NS_Winter.pdf

Don't know how anyone would vote OU's as the worst looking from inside. Just go to a game there. Nothing matches. It is like patchwork.

Glad many of you guys can admit how God-awful Kyle Field is set up aesthetically.

It is not a slam on environment, crowds, etc.

It looks like 2 separate erector set projects.

2/3rd of DKR is awesome. The last 3rd sucks too!

quote:

---

I think DKR is ugly as all get out. But then again I've never cared Spanish arches.

---

What Spanish arches?

Kyle may be a fun gameday experience, but it is ugly as sin! Maybe sometime in the next two decades after A&M is at least better than mediocre, will it look somewhat decent...

What tu did with dkr, as hard as it is to admit, looks very nice...looks like real thought was paid to that...Kyle looks aweful!

I mean, did the third deck of the ZONE really have to have those angled-in ends??? The answer to that is no! I have sat, literally, in the very corner and you can easily tell that the view from the deck (had it been completed normally) would still be fine...I wonder whose brainfart that was!

Good this one is no longer in existence... it was a dinosaur

quote:

---

Am I the only one here that thinks that Kyle Field looks pretty damn cool?

---

Nope!

I always thought the Washington Huskies have a pretty cool looking stadium, but I don't know it's capacity and am too lazy to look it up for the purposes of this thread.

Husky stadium has great views and is definitely the coolest setting...but the stadium itself is in terrible shape and ugly IMO. The field feels like its a mile away from the stands. Seats 72.5...close enough for the discussion.



[This message has been edited by SJEAg (edited 10/27/2009 4:08p).]

I can't believe the stands at Rice are still wood. They were wood when I went to my first game there in 79.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We need to develop an actual master plan for Kyle. It needs to include major renovations inside and out and a homogenous plan going forward that will account for a more symetrical looking stadium. I think some form of this plan would work:

Phase One: Connect the lower decks on the south end of the stadium to match the north end. At that point you would at least have one level that is a complete bowl all the way around the field.

Phase Two: Demolition of the third deck on the east side. Students move to the south end zone until this phase is complete. A new third deck is added to the East side, with suites between decks two and three to match the west side. This phase also needs to include the renovation and upgrading of the concourses on both the west side and east side to at least match the concourses in the Zone. Put in an alumni club on the West side to generate revenue.

Phase Three: Connect the second deck bowl on the south end of the stadium. At this point, stadium capacity exceeds 100k, don't know if we'll need more seats for a while, so we can concentrate on upgrades to exterior finishes and suite amenities until adding third deck in the end zone.

Phase Four: Field suites surrounding most of the field. We can't lower the field because it would mess with the site lines from the upper decks. I think an alternative would be to add field level "bunker" suites at field level to generate more revenue. We're way behind some of the other big programs in suite revenue, that has to change.

Edit: For the record, I don't really like bunker suites, but the way they've been done at the new cowboy stadium is to provide the ticket holders in the suite to also have matching tickets in the stands, so they can experience both. They are a bad view during the game (at least from the sidelines, maybe not the end zones) so fans have the option of being either in the stands or in the suite.

Definitely one of the best.

75K+ tard. Get some people to come to your games and we'll talk.

Now go get your shine box.

quote:

---

Check out pages 9-11 of this PDF. It shows the facade that they're looking to add to Neyland.

http://www.utsports.com/facilities/08_NS_Winter.pdf

---

Embarassing typo at the bottom of page 11.

Pretty sure that's Doak Campbell, not Jones AT&T Cell Phone Stadium.

I'm slightly confused why 2 posters think the Big House is ugly. That stadium is a thing of beauty-- how the fans are on top of the field all the way around it.. That's how football stadiums should be (and would be if not for schools initially having tracks around the field). Not to mention the largest capacity. Plus no overkill on the end zone seating.

Perhaps some don't like it because of the drastic contrast it has with Kyle field, I dunno.

Neyland from the inside looks a lot like the Cotton Bowl from the inside. No wonder they kicked our butt in the Cotton Bowl.

My Favorite Stadium:


Louisiana Superdome

My Least Favorite Stadiums:


Cotton Bowl


Independence Bowl

Aggie, I've been to the new & improved DKR. Like I said, no matter how nice they make it, they could put $1 Billion into it, it is, and always will be, a total and complete dump! If for no other reason than the team that plays there and their baby-s**t colors!

Pig stadium is nice, I'll be there next season for the Bama game...but what's up with those seats at the top of the endzone. Bleachers? Really? That doesn't look or seem safe at all...

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned parking yet. After looking at all of these stadiums, and personally having been to many of them it is clearly evident that we have one of the best parking scenarios in all of college football.

The Super Dome is your favorite........?!

Cal's stadium is dump.

And yes, it has the Hayward fault line running right through the stadium. Most experts expect the next "big one" in California to be on the Hayward line.

Due to the fault line, very few upgrades have been done to the stadium. In fact, they dont even have indoor plumbing on the West Side! They have a lot of port o potties. And the stands suck. Small, wooden planks. VERY uncomfortable.

Besides all that, a great setting on a beautiful campus (minus the tree huggers).

Gee, KF does look like an open tacklebox. But, the only thing that maters is what happens on the green part.

out of all of those stadiums, ours is the ugliest/worst.

BUT YEA LETS LIGHT UP THE LETTERS AND NOT FIX THE CONCESSIONS OR BATHROOMS!!! LOL LOL LOL!!!

LETS NOT EVEN TRY TO MAKE OUR STADIUM LOOK "PASSABLE"

lets be honest though. kyle field can have the pageantry because of the 12th man and all, but this stadium is a dump

[This message has been edited by Palooza11 (edited 10/28/2009 10:02a).]

Personally, I am glad we put more money into the players facilities than trying to make Kyle look pretty. Maybe when/if we win a couple championships we should renovate Kyle's exterior aesthetics.

I know this isn't a 75k+ stadium, but I am glad we don't play in the Akron Rubber Bowl. From there and been to a game there and it is a dump.





rln_'01 Whoop!

I remember going from Austin to Kyle in about '71 and being shocked at how small it was and how small A&M was. I had always imagined it being real big.

About 15 years later I went back and it was a lot bigger.....and then you guys built the Zone.

It is not beautiful but it is pretty impressive in an awkward sort of way.

But.....my favorite football game of all time anywhere is Texas v. A&M at College Station. Your many weird traditions that make no sense to the rest of us, the constant "howdies" and the corps stuff make it the most entertaining game on the schedule for this Horn.

And it gets a little loud at times.

And the bonfire game was the most inspiring game I ever went to. Look forward to Thanksgiving every year but especially when we play you guys at your Kyle field, my favorite stadium.

good post

Good post, Huisache! Glad you enjoy our admittedly weird traditions. I hope the tailgating Ags share their cold beer and hot chili with you this Thanksgiving.

i love arkie's stadium along w/ oregon's and Bama's.

quote:

---

That old Stanford stadium makes my head hurt to look at it. Is it a lower case "a"? It isn't even a real circle. What the hell is going on there?

---

The old Stanford stadium dates from the time when track and field was a bigger collegiate sport. Note the track between the stands and the field. The extension of the track into the stem of the lowercase a allows the 100 yard/meter dash to be placed so the finish lines would be before the curve.

The downsides of this design: the track puts the stands further from the field and the stadium is pretty empty for any track meet that's not the Olympics. The new stadium is on the same site, has fewer seats and more luxury boxes. The old one was big enough to host a Super Bowl and Olympic soccer during the LA games (even though Stanford is 400 miles from LA).

I haven't been in the new stadium, but I thought the old one was pretty and an OK place to watch the game.

The Stanford AD cited failure to fill the new stadium as part of why he canned Walt Harris for going 1-11 in his second year.

Even with the

quote:

---

That old Stanford stadium makes my head hurt to look at it. Is it a lower case "a"? It isn't even a real circle. What the hell is going on there?

---

The old Stanford stadium dates from the time when track and field was a bigger collegiate sport. Note the track between the stands and the field. The extension of the track into the stem of the lowercase a allows the 100 yard/meter dash to be placed so the finish lines would be before the curve.

The downsides of this design: the track puts the stands further from the field and the stadium is pretty empty for any track meet that's not the Olympics. The new stadium is on the same site, has fewer seats and more luxury boxes. The old one was big enough to host a Super Bowl and Olympic soccer during the LA games (even though Stanford is 400 miles from LA).

I haven't been in the new stadium, but I thought the old one was pretty and an OK place to watch the game.

The Stanford AD cited failure to fill the new stadium as part of why he canned Walt Harris for going 1-11 in his second year.


[This message has been edited by biobioprof (edited 10/31/2009 1:40p).]