Jake

I just disagree Zach. It appears that it is you who obsesses over someone being "wrong". It is your problem that you can't handle dissension and no one elses.

quote name='Dave in Green' post='96871' date='Oct 31 2009, 06:24 PM']As in all types of politics, I'm open to good data presented in positive campaigning by all sides, and closed to all forms of negative campaigning by all sides, no matter how persistent, steadfast, passionate and assertive. Some of the most noble as well as some of the most despicable people and organizations in history have been persistent, steadfast, passionate and assertive in pursuit of their causes.You are interested in process. I and others are interested in results and I seek those results through legitimate paths and not the mental masturbation that you seem obsessed with.And your original objection was to my quality of persistence without your afterthought of its application to good or bad objectives. You claimed that my persistence somehow discredited my opinion. Persitence alone is not a bad thing and if you are going to turn it into a bad thing, then at least have the intestinal fortitude to back it up with some facts. It's obvious that my unwllingnness to back down is being redefined by you and those who would confuse backbone with arrogance.

All hail the mighty akronad...the smartest most knowledgable and most arrogant person on these boards...LOL. He has spoken with a person in the city that (it should read, who) is familiar with all of the inner workings (oooohhhhh, i'm scared over the term "inner workings"...not!) as far as sports and athletic events are concerned and there are ongoing discussions taking place. Hey, akronad, I am very much aware of the fact there are ongoing discussions taking place. Mind telling us how that fact discredits my position? I don't claim to be almighty even though you have chosen to bestow that title upon me under the influence of your own rage and weird insecurities.I'm curious as to why you have this need to personally attack me just because I have an opinion that I am willing to stick to and back up. I don't back down and that quality in me seems to upset you. What a weird person you must be for getting so upset over consistency and sticktoitvness. It appears that you and some others on this blog suffer from the same ailment that our football team suffers from and that is the lack of BALLS!

Jake, first I want to say that I appreciate the point of view that it would be better to build a new facility on campus than off campus. I think this is a valid point of view, and I like hearing different people present different rationales for different opinions.A couple of points, though. Unless one subscribes to the black and white viewpoint that one inch off campus is purgatory and one inch on campus is heaven, no amount of arguing is going to convince more than a few people that the facility must be built on campus to be truly successful for UA. Quite the contrary, that will be interpreted by most open-minded people as an extremist position that will turn off those who are looking for the most rational position that benefits the most people. Proximity is important, and it's undeniable that there is a significant difference between the distant location of the Rubber Bowl and a block or two off campus. So if you want to be taken seriously, you need to seriously evaluate whether you are putting forth the best possible argument in favor of your postion.Secondly, if, as you say, UA will be the major if not only contributor to its arena, then, of course, there'd be no reason not to have it on campus. The whole concept of having it downtown is based on sharing costs with the city and perhaps also the county. Many people here might be more inclined to support your position if what you say is proven fact. But I haven't seen any hard evidence that what you are presenting is anything more than your opinion, even though you appear to state your opinion as hard fact. And since you are so vehemently against having the new facility anywhere but on campus under any conceivable circumstances, open-minded people like me are going to have a hard time not believing that you are only making these definitive statements to support your passionately held personal opinion.Again, I think the position you have taken is a good one to be made, and I hope that you and others will continue to try to make points for why it would be better for a new facility to be built on campus rather than off. But if the objective is to win people over to your point of view, I think you need to give consideration to the fact that the people who you are addressing on this forum are sophisticated enough not to confuse the validity of a position with the persistence of that position's advocates.Dave, I really think you are personifying the issue. You are placing too much weight on the sender of the message as opposed to the message. I would suggest that your preocupation with what you think is "having an open mind" is taking precedent over the need to do the right thing. Your type of thinking is not what got us an on-campus stadium. While it may serve the purposes of having a blog, it does very little for serving reality and progress. Your heaven/purgatory analogy is at best over the top. I'm surprised that you didn't use the worn out cliche', "think outside the box" on me along with the "have an open mind" ruse. There comes a time when an open mind is nothing more than riding the fence. I also think that people in general and not just on this nice little blog, are sophisticated enough to know that there is no hard proof that the city or county is going to assist UA in building an arena. Your condemnation of the quality, known as persistence is disturbing. For it was this quality along with steadfastness, passion and assertiveness that got us more green space on campus, the closing of Buchtel and Carroll Streets, the University Park Alliance, InfoCision Stadium and a more pedestrian friendly UA campus.One cannot come up against the powers that would emasculate UA and hi-jack its facilities with the type of wishy-washy postureing you advocate. The sender of the message in a discussion forum is irrelevant. The message is everything, and the message is in the words. For example, persistence, steadfastness, passion and assertiveness are all neutral qualities that can be associated with either good or bad outcomes. They do not in themselves make one side of an argument more valid or authoritative than another.I'll happily continue to ride the fence until I'm convinced by logical points of fact that one option clearly makes more sense than the others.Fair enough. You can ride the fence for as long as you wish. In the mean time, the effort to build an arena either on-campus or not, continues and there are people on both sides of that fence who are pushing their agenda in the midst of others who think that the issue is something to play Socrates over.I'm happy that you think the sender of the message is irrelevant. However, I disagree with your calling the qualities known as, persistence, steadfastness, passion and assertiveness as neutral. They are not. They are positive qualities and are the mark of prudent people and institutions who know how and when to go full steam ahead! We are closer to a new University of Akron Arena than you might think. Its location on campus is critical to more than its singular success in the parochial vacuum that too many Akronites like to place everything. Its campus location and identity plays into the bigger picture of a vibrant, influential institution of higher learning that will make the difference between a Northern Ohio region that struggles and one that succeeds. In that vein, reducing it to a "downtown Akron" issue is ridiculously beyond parochial.

as much as I hate to say it, but I am doubting we can even do that.I share your pain and doubt. I'll be there nonetheless.Huskies 27ZIPS 10

You mean like the alcohol that is served in The University of Akron's on-campus E.J. Thomas Performing Arts Hall, student union, Martin Center and dorms? IS that the alcohol that you are talking about? Alcohol has been served on the UA campus for the past 35 plus years and it's not going to stop. Please stop with the fake issues that don't even belong in the conversation. The decision to not serve liquor in Info was a qualified one with liquor being served in parts of it and there is every reason to believe that that policy will be made more liberal by next season. There is no credence to the claim that an on-campus arena can't have liquor. It simply isn't true and you are using it as a red herring to cloud the issue and win your position at all cost.Also, try taking a look at the amount and variety of events that take place in UA's performing arts hall. As I have said before, the UA campus is replete with examples of the huge amount and variety of events it holds in its many facilities. It makes no sense to claim that UA would not accomodate car shows, home and garden shows, circuses, concerts, and hockey, when for the most part it already has. An on-campus arena is just as capable of being multi-purpose as and off-campus arena.And, please tell me what you think my motives are since I've not been a part of the precious blog long enough to satisfy you. Did you ever stop to think that some issues are bigger than this little narrow blog of sports fans? Did you ever stop to think that all of UA and not just its sports programs have enjoyed the support and vision of many giving people in this community long before this blog was a twinkle in anyone's eye? Let me give you a clue. IT'S NOT ABOUT THIS BLOG AND IT NEVER WAS AND ITS NOT EVER GOING TO BE: This blog is fine but it needs kept in perspective. I guess I made the mistake of thinking it is a means to an end and not an end in itself. I didn't realize it was an extension of the Buchtelite - a publication that doesn't know the means from the end if its life depended on it.And by the way, many of Akron's dinasours who have held our university back have been residents for 40+ years. In fact, they are the same dinasours who wanted the on-campus football stadium "closer to downtown" so it wouldn't look like a campus facility and city hall could take credit for it.

Jake, first I want to say that I appreciate the point of view that it would be better to build a new facility on campus than off campus. I think this is a valid point of view, and I like hearing different people present different rationales for different opinions.A couple of points, though. Unless one subscribes to the black and white viewpoint that one inch off campus is purgatory and one inch on campus is heaven, no amount of arguing is going to convince more than a few people that the facility must be built on campus to be truly successful for UA. Quite the contrary, that will be interpreted by most open-minded people as an extremist position that will turn off those who are looking for the most rational position that benefits the most people. Proximity is important, and it's undeniable that there is a significant difference between the distant location of the Rubber Bowl and a block or two off campus. So if you want to be taken seriously, you need to seriously evaluate whether you are putting forth the best possible argument in favor of your postion.Secondly, if, as you say, UA will be the major if not only contributor to its arena, then, of course, there'd be no reason not to have it on campus. The whole concept of having it downtown is based on sharing costs with the city and perhaps also the county. Many people here might be more inclined to support your position if what you say is proven fact. But I haven't seen any hard evidence that what you are presenting is anything more than your opinion, even though you appear to state your opinion as hard fact. And since you are so vehemently against having the new facility anywhere but on campus under any conceivable circumstances, open-minded people like me are going to have a hard time not believing that you are only making these definitive statements to support your passionately held personal opinion.Again, I think the position you have taken is a good one to be made, and I hope that you and others will continue to try to make points for why it would be better for a new facility to be built on campus rather than off. But if the objective is to win people over to your point of view, I think you need to give consideration to the fact that the people who you are addressing on this forum are sophisticated enough not to confuse the validity of a position with the persistence of that position's advocates.Dave, I really think you are personifying the issue. You are placing too much weight on the sender of the message as opposed to the message. I would suggest that your preocupation with what you think is "having an open mind" is taking precedent over the need to do the right thing. Your type of thinking is not what got us an on-campus stadium. While it may serve the purposes of having a blog, it does very little for serving reality and progress. Your heaven/purgatory analogy is at best over the top. I'm surprised that you didn't use the worn out cliche', "think outside the box" on me along with the "have an open mind" ruse. There comes a time when an open mind is nothing more than riding the fence. I also think that people in general and not just on this nice little blog, are sophisticated enough to know that there is no hard proof that the city or county is going to assist UA in building an arena. Your condemnation of the quality, known as persistence is disturbing. For it was this quality along with steadfastness, passion and assertiveness that got us more green space on campus, the closing of Buchtel and Carroll Streets, the University Park Alliance, InfoCision Stadium and a more pedestrian friendly UA campus.One cannot come up against the powers that would emasculate UA and hi-jack its facilities with the type of wishy-washy postureing you advocate.

DNA databasing is no more illegal, inappropriate or unconstitutional than a finger print data base. It's just an improved unique identifier and that's all it is. At first, I thought it kind of offensive, but strip away the emotions and histrionics and it only makes sense. For years now we've been finger printing people who want to be foster parents or adoptive parents. I was finger printed when I accepted my last job. I also had to pee in a cup. DNA testing will be the status quo. UA is ahead of the curve. That's all.

sorry, you're right. If I were to change my vote from 12K, it would be 15K. I realize filling it for b ball may be a long shot at least for a while, but UA could justify it with some dynamite shows that aren't feasable for Thomas Hall. Also, we need to buid for the future and 15K would seem reasonable in that vein.

Marching band, intermurals, soccer and other teams on occasion. soccer? why would the soccer team practice/play soccer next to the soccer field and not in it? Besides, a football field does not accomodate a soccer game very well. Marching Band can practice in Info. Also, that photo of the marching band that you posted looks like they are playing in the Field House. So, there are two resources for the band not counting the practice football field. And maybe I'm not on campus enough but I've never seen intramurals and other teams including soccer on the football practice field. Outside of marching band and varsity football practice, that piece of land seems pretty unused.

Blue & Gold states, "I hope UA goes at the new arena with the same mindset with which they built the Info."I like your thinking, 'Blue & Gold'. And, a big part of UA's mindset for the Info was to build it on campus. Heck, I'll go so far to say that the BIGGEST part of that mindset was to put the stadium on campus! Like Proenza and Curtis said, "It's about time that this campus gets what it deserves...we had to make sure that if we are going to do it, we have to do it right the first time because we are not going to get the chance to build another stadium for a long, long time...the Rubber Bowl was a fine facility but it lacked something and that was that it wasn't on campus."

I'm not opposed to your suggestion. If we could make real improvements and enhancements that would make the JAR truly multi-purpose, which would include a "real" ceiling" as well as upholstered seats, increased capacity even if it's only by 500, a more theater looking atmosphere without disturbing the season, it may be worth it. I'd rather see things done right with what we have on-campus rather than make the big mistake of building an off-campus money waisting failure.Also, can someone tell me why UA still needs the football practice field on Jackson Field next to Shrank Hall when we have the Stile Field House and now InfoCision on campus? Maybe, I'm missing something, but it seems such a waste of precious space for the campus.

Your's will do just fine.

The City/Port authority is in no financial position to be a contributor, let alone a major contributor to a UA arena. For crying out loud, the City/Port Authority can barely support The Akron Civic Theater. It's ludicrous to believe that it can contribute any amount of money to a UA Arena. It is clear to me that the proponents of a downtown arena want to ride UA's purse right into the ground with all of this absurd talk that the city is actually going to chip in financuially on the effort. The city is attempting to take UA for the ride of its lifetime on this bogus downtown arena debacleAlso, proximity to campus and walking distance is not the issue. The issue is that UA will be the major if not only contributor to its arena and needs to construct it on campus. Close to campus is not good enough. Downtown is not on campus nor does it look or feel like a campus. Just because you can walk from point A to point B does not make point B on campus or worthy of campus identity. Again, UA went to a great deal of trouble and $$$ to create a pedestrian friendly, real campus that no longer looks like hilltop high. We don't need UA to turn the clock back to hilltop high days with major traffic running through the middle of campus facilities and activities. When parents and potential students come to UA to consider enrolling, they are not going to be impressed with an arena that is close to campus as they will with an arena that is on campus. Comparing the rubber bowl to Polsky is not apples and oranges. Both are owned by UA and both do not look on campus and both are not considered by UA as being on campus. Please take note of the UA trail blazer on Main Street next to Polsky. It has an arrow pointing east indicating that UA is east of downtown and not in downtown. Universities with credibility are self-contained and have clearly marked boundaries and many of these universities are in the heart of their host cities. Shuttle busses are not the issue either. And to even imply that an on-campus facility would alienate the community is so absurd it's almost criminal. Does the on-campus stadium send the message to the community that it is for the university only? Of course not and I think you already know that. Are you aware that InfoCision is hosting 7 community high school football games this season and that the general public uses Jackson Field, the student union, Rhodes Arena the residence halls, the Rec Center, Paul Daum Theater, Guzzetta Hall, The Martin Center and E.J. Thomas Hall on a regular basis? All of these facilities are 100% UA facilites and clearly on campus proper. They have no problem making the greater Akron/Northeast Ohio general public feel welcome to campus. So, quit pulling arguments from your butt.Also, we don't need to advocate the take over of downtown by UA. Both entities can and should exist on their own. One doesn't need to cancel out the other. Nor, should both entities glob into one another. Real universites and their real host communities know how to co-exist and interdepend (symbiosis) on one another without losing their unique and separate indentities.Believe it or not, UA can have a real campus that is self-contained and still have its arms open to the community. It's doing it as we speak. A pseudo college/downtown arena cheapens both the university and the city. It would be a monument to mediocrity illustrating that neither entity can stand on its own. It will make Akron, Ohio the shell game capitol of the nation and revert UA back to Hilltop High.Nothing could be better for this community than to be host to a prestigious, authentic, well known and credible university with it's own clear sense of visual/physical boundaries separate from that of the greater city. It's how real universities present themselves and it is how real universities attract more students and gain popularity. No one wants to attend, let alone support a fake looking university.Also, It doesn't follow that a better downtown helps UA. In fact it's the other way around. Once UA starts to water down its identity to downtown politicians and businesses, both the university and community will suffer in the long run. The University of Akron is the horse and downtown Akron is at best, the cart. Reverse that order and the Akron dinasours will ruin everything this university has gained for itself, the community and the region.

Building an arena on campus will not take away from green space anymore than any other new project. The arena can go on many campus or soon-to-be campus areas that won't disturb the growing campus green space. It doesn't make sense to argue that we can't have campus facilities because we want to have grass and trees and therefore must build all future structures off campus in order to have green space. The stadium did not pose such a cooked up green space problem and it is far larger than any arena could be. Why pose such an argument against a campus arena but not against other future campus facilities? Your claim that an arena will "ruin" campus green space comes off as contrived and disingenuous.

I don't see the city in a position to finance anything of this nature Akron people have voted this down repeatedly in one form or another and with pending layoffs or the threat of such, city government in no way can assist the university in this endavor. UA is far more capable of handling a multi-purpose arena than the city. UA has the connections and alumni to support this effort as long as it is on the UA campus.I voted for a 12k seat arena. We need to keep in mind that it will be for more events than just basketball and just sports. And the seats need to be actual seats no different than E.J. Thomas Hall's seats...that is if you want to seriously consider it an arena and a multi-purpose one at that. There shouldn't be a bleacher in the house. P.S. we are now tied again with the Bulls 14 to 14. Goooo Zips!

I am on the phone now asking them what is going on.keep us posted!You'll love this. I just got back from Ken Stewart's on Market. I was in the bar having lunch. The Notre Dam game was on one screen and Zips on another. At one point a couple wanted the staff who were gonig back and forth watching the Zips to turn the Zips game to the Can't game. The bar tender said no and pointed to me saying "he's watching the zips". When they had the nerve to object, I tuned to the couple and reminded them, "hello, this is Akron Ohio and you two are in Roo Town. If you want to watch the Can't game, go to a resaurant in Can't." Even the people who were watching Notre Dam got testy when the bar tender turned the channel. They kept referring to the Zips game as, "that other game". These are the typical Akron dinasours who don't care about their university and the first to call the school "Akron U" . BTW, the Bulls just scored. They are now ahead 14 - 7

Are you tuned into channel 31 on Warner Cable?

Dave in green, thanks. I couldn't agree with you more. And akronad, I couldn't disagree with you more. Downtown Akron is no more on campus than the Rubber Bowl. The student housing down there is not campus housing. It is private housing just like in Can't. Can't State doesn't claim that area as campus. Why do some Akron yokals want to claim everything in downtown's reach as on campus when it is not? The downtown private development is a good thing but it is not on campus. Same goes for anything else downtown. The Polsky Buiulding is just that, an obsolete department store owned by the university. Polsky is not on campus. And, a downtown arena will not be on campus either. All a logical and honest person needs to do is to take a look at downtown Akron and then take a look at the enhancements UA has done to make itself look like a real university campus which includes the stadium. Does downtown look like a campus? NO! At best, it looks like the way UA looked when it was dubbed Hilltop High. Major streets and vehicular traffic running through the middle of campus property and facilities does not a real campus make. It seems that some of our locals (dinasours) want UA to look like Cleveland State, Youngstown State and other pseudo colleges in the region. People of progress and authenticity know that an on-campus, multipurpose arena is just as essential as an on-campus stadium if not more so.BUILD THE UNIVERSITY OF AKRON ARENA ON THE UNIVERSITY OF AKRON CAMPUS AND NOT DOWNTOWN. It's not rocket science people.

I love it. Something like this definitely needs to go on the actual UA campus near the stadium and not downtown. The rest of the Summit County/NE Ohio region will have no problem being served by such a great campus facility. The on-campus stadium is good for downtown and so will an on-campus arena be. To quote the ABJ in a story on InfoCision Stadium, "the community is supporting the on-campus venue". It's a win/win with an on-campus arena. As the mayor stated at the opening of InfoCision, "being on campus gives the facility that campus atmosphere that everyone loves and is attracted to."I think we are close to having a brand new, state-of-the-art, multi-purpose, true on-campus arena. First Energy will be a great financial backer for another superb campus facility adjacent to a superb on-campus football stadium. It 's great to read how one of its reps accompanied campus representatives (NOTE: not city or county representatives) on this field trip.If they build it on campus UA wont get a dime from 1st energy, summit county, or Akron. Lets get real here. Im not opposed to on campus but finding another 70Million or so for an arena will be awful hard for Dr P to justify!! If its going to happen it WILL be downtown (possibly on Quaker site on campus), whether Jake likes it or not.Info fan - your info is laughable. What evidence do you have that First Energy won't give a dime for a UA campus arena? None, just as I thought. UA has a much better relationship with First Energy than anyone in Akron. You are just blowing smoke. Keep in mind it was First Energy and UA officials who went on this field trip and no one from the city or county. Akron and Summit county has no money to help UA build its campus arena. Get real. The mayor and county executive want so bad to ride UA like their personal balogna pony and UA won't let them do it and neither will I. Get it through your head, the arena is going on the actual campus just like the stadium...end of discussion.Also know this about who gets and doesn't get a dime and from whom. If the city builds an arena off-campus, it won't get a dime from the University of Akron and its state funded supporters The governor and Board of Regents will make sure of that. And, keep this in mind: the biggest dime always comes from The University of Akron and not from First Energy. First Energy goes where The University of Akron says it should and not the mayor or Russ Pry.

I try not to dissapoint g mann !

What was wrong with the E.J. label? It looked ok.What E.J. Label? It's not even there. That's my point. I'll look again, but I couldn't even see it.

I love it. Something like this definitely needs to go on the actual UA campus near the stadium and not downtown. The rest of the Summit County/NE Ohio region will have no problem being served by such a great campus facility. The on-campus stadium is good for downtown and so will an on-campus arena be. To quote the ABJ in a story on InfoCision Stadium, "the community is supporting the on-campus venue". It's a win/win with an on-campus arena. As the mayor stated at the opening of InfoCision, "being on campus gives the facility that campus atmosphere that everyone loves and is attracted to."I think we are close to having a brand new, state-of-the-art, multi-purpose, true on-campus arena. First Energy will be a great financial backer for another superb campus facility adjacent to a superb on-campus football stadium. It 's great to read how one of its reps accompanied campus representatives (NOTE: not city or county representatives) on this field trip.

I also love how they labeled E.J. Thomas Hall. If this is an updated map, I'd hate to see an outdated one.

I thought it would make several people happy. (Including me).Specific details are that it has to attach to the second floor of the "hotel" dorm rooms as well as have a ground entry on the Quaker side. Span the 200 ft while maintaining clearance height for trains and have a ground entry on the eastern side of tracks.Help me to visualize here. Would this bridge in essence connect The Quaker Square Inn at The University of Akron with The UA Performing Arts Hall (aka: E.J. Thomas) or to The Wonder Bread Company and auto parts store?