UPA & KUD

[ZippyRulz]

http://www.rejournals.com/2011/10/17/massi...rsity-of-akron/

[johnnyzip84]

http://www.rejournals.com/2011/10/17/massi...rsity-of-akron/

Sounds great!Here is another source, one that specifically mentions that discussions have taken place regarding an arena for UA.

[ZippyRulz]

http://www.rejournals.com/2011/10/17/massi...rsity-of-akron/

Sounds great!Here is another source, one that specifically mentions that discussions have taken place regarding an arena for UA.

Nice.Projects discussed reportedly include office, retail, housing and medical private uses, as well as residence halls, research buildings and an arena for the university. Individual projects are expected to move forward in the coming months now that the relationship with KUD is in place, according to the alliance statement. “Akron has a well developed plan and vision,” said KUD president and CEO Marvin Suomi in the statement.

[Dave in Green]

There's already an active thread on this very subject:arena project going forward?

[GoZips]

These "plans" pop up ever so often. Usually every three or four years.Mostly a lot of hot air and wishful thinking.There was a movement to build a state of the art basketball arena thatseats 11,000. Architectural work was done to the point of semi-detaileddrawings, four color artist renditions, and even a model.Not sure what killed the project other than a major issue lead by the mayorof Akron to have core of the arena built around a hockey base. This KILLSthe intimacy that basketball coaches want because the fans are moved awayfrom the action on the court.While a civic arena might love to have hockey possibilities it is certain deathfor collegiate basketball. Sure, the "Q" has hockey and it is a large building.Professional sports rarely play in band box arenas so loved by college coaches.The venue is not right for college sports.A couple of years ago the Zips played an NIT game at UMASS in Amherst, Mass.That arena is dual hockey/basketball and their fans hate the building. I wasthere and saw first hand lack of intimacy you find in purpose built basketballvenues.We are also entangled at the present time with a Federal government that meddlesin everything. Its short comings are readily apparent. The government rarelysucceeds in pulling off these grandiose schemes. This one wont work either.

[ZippyRulz]

This isn't just about a basketball arena, it's about executing the Master Plan for the entire University Park area, with 4 different districts, and now they've hired a company to oversee it, with "projects expected to move forward in the coming months." Arena-specific comments are probably better suited for the basketball forum.

[UAZipster0305]

These "plans" pop up ever so often. Usually every three or four years.Mostly a lot of hot air and wishful thinking.There was a movement to build a state of the art basketball arena thatseats 11,000. Architectural work was done to the point of semi-detaileddrawings, four color artist renditions, and even a model.Not sure what killed the project other than a major issue lead by the mayorof Akron to have core of the arena built around a hockey base. This KILLSthe intimacy that basketball coaches want because the fans are moved awayfrom the action on the court.While a civic arena might love to have hockey possibilities it is certain deathfor collegiate basketball. Sure, the "Q" has hockey and it is a large building.Professional sports rarely play in band box arenas so loved by college coaches.The venue is not right for college sports.A couple of years ago the Zips played an NIT game at UMASS in Amherst, Mass.That arena is dual hockey/basketball and their fans hate the building. I wasthere and saw first hand lack of intimacy you find in purpose built basketballvenues.We are also entangled at the present time with a Federal government that meddlesin everything. Its short comings are readily apparent. The government rarelysucceeds in pulling off these grandiose schemes. This one wont work either.

Completely unnecessary to include random, unrelated political commentary in your post. This has nothing to do with the federal government. Money would likely come from the City and State.

[johnnyzip84]

This isn't just about a basketball arena, it's about executing the Master Plan for the entire University Park area, with 4 different districts, and now they've hired a company to oversee it, with "projects expected to move forward in the coming months." Arena-specific comments are probably better suited for the basketball forum.

+1

Completely unnecessary to include random, unrelated political commentary in your post. This has nothing to do with the federal government. Money would come likely come from the City and State.

+10

[Blue & Gold]

...to have core of the arena built around a hockey base. This KILLSthe intimacy that basketball coaches want because the fans are moved awayfrom the action on the court.

I agree. I'm crossing my fingers for a national-class basketball arena.

[Z.I.P.]

I agree. I'm crossing my fingers for a national-class basketball arena.

You and GoZips are SO right -- college fans Soooo love intimacy. Pro basketball fans HATE intimacy!

[RootforRoo44]

personally, i think it would be foolish to build a new arena that didn't double as a hockey arena.

[tbozeglav]

I agree. I'm crossing my fingers for a national-class basketball arena.

You and GoZips are SO right -- college fans Soooo love intimacy. Pro basketball fans HATE intimacy!

I think the underlying difference between what they're suggesting and what you are suggesting is simply scale. However, I think you are right in that a well-designed multi-purpose facility can be both intimate for basketball games (something about that phrase irks me lol) and useable for uses such as hockey and the like. To exemplify this, simply look at Gund Arena/The "Q". I think thats a great place to watch a basketball game. Hell, even when we play the MAC Championship games there, they block off that 3rd tier of seats and it really makes the place feel smaller and more "intimate", if you will. I think we could scale that down a bit to our realistic numbers (as others have mentioned, somewhere in the 7-10k range) by imitating the Q's lower 2 tiers while retaining an excellent basketball venue and allowing for multi-purpose use.

[ZachTheZip]

personally, i think it would be foolish to build a new arena that didn't double as a hockey arena.

I agree.We need to think about the future. This thing needs to be able to last well into the future and to handle whatever we might need to use it for. We can't afford to be short-sighted like the JAR was.

[Doug Snyder]

personally, i think it would be foolish to build a new arena that didn't double as a hockey arena.

I agree.We need to think about the future. This thing needs to be able to last well into the future and to handle whatever we might need to use it for. We can't afford to be short-sighted like the JAR was.

You have Zach on your side. I rest my case.UofA will not be getting a hockey team. It would require great expense and mean adding a couple more sports for women. If you think the UofA is loooking to ADD millions rather tham reduce millions you may not be that well informed.Build a state of art basketball arena between 7-8,000. And if you think that we should plan for a hockey team...then build the arena at 15,000 because the only way that will happen is if we are members of a BCS conference and attendance and money are no longer issues.

[tbozeglav]

Doug, you do bring up an interesting point. I believe youre right that the university isnt looking to ADD more to its expenditures than it has to. So in that case, youre right.Does anyone know of any outside groups that might be interested in using the facility if it were capable of hosting as a hockey venue? I personally dont know of any off the top of my head, but this would be a guiding factor towards where the university should design the new arena. If theres little interest in using the facility if it had hockey capabilities, then I agree... build for basketball first and find ways to make the others work.

[g-mann17]

personally, i think it would be foolish to build a new arena that didn't double as a hockey arena.

I agree.We need to think about the future. This thing needs to be able to last well into the future and to handle whatever we might need to use it for. We can't afford to be short-sighted like the JAR was.

You have Zach on your side. I rest my case.UofA will not be getting a hockey team. It would require great expense and mean adding a couple more sports for women. If you think the UofA is loooking to ADD millions rather tham reduce millions you may not be that well informed.Build a state of art basketball arena between 7-8,000. And if you think that we should plan for a hockey team...then build the arena at 15,000 because the only way that will happen is if we are members of a BCS conference and attendance and money are no longer issues.

Doug problem is that any arena that happens will be a community effort. As such they will likely build something that can be programmed for multiple events. That means an interchangeable floor and something that holds a hockey match. A multipurpose facility in the north means concerts, hockey, monster truck, basketball, circus. And look at the Mullins Center for UMass, the seats come right down on top of the court on all 4 sides. It works well, and they are much farther along in designing these things after 40 some years.

[Doug Snyder]

personally, i think it would be foolish to build a new arena that didn't double as a hockey arena.

I agree.We need to think about the future. This thing needs to be able to last well into the future and to handle whatever we might need to use it for. We can't afford to be short-sighted like the JAR was.

You have Zach on your side. I rest my case.UofA will not be getting a hockey team. It would require great expense and mean adding a couple more sports for women. If you think the UofA is loooking to ADD millions rather tham reduce millions you may not be that well informed.Build a state of art basketball arena between 7-8,000. And if you think that we should plan for a hockey team...then build the arena at 15,000 because the only way that will happen is if we are members of a BCS conference and attendance and money are no longer issues.

Doug problem is that any arena that happens will be a community effort. As such they will likely build something that can be programmed for multiple events. That means an interchangeable floor and something that holds a hockey match. A multipurpose facility in the north means concerts, hockey, monster truck, basketball, circus. And look at the Mullins Center for UMass, the seats come right down on top of the court on all 4 sides. It works well, and they are much farther along in designing these things after 40 some years.

It is a different story if the city wants to build an arena that the Zips could also use. If it would be great for basketball...count me in (assuming most, if not all the financing comes from the city). But that is not the discussion I was commenting on. There are some who want the UofA to plan ahead and build an arena than can be used for hockey. That to me seems extremely foolish.

[zippy5]

personally, i think it would be foolish to build a new arena that didn't double as a hockey arena.

i agree, but that's because i really like hockey.p.s. i think you guys are overstating how un-"intimate" it'd be if it was fit for hockey too.

[Dave in Green]

Why don't we look at the dimensions of hockey rinks and basketball courts to get a better idea of exactly what it would take for an arena to accomodate both:A hockey rink is 200 feet long and 85 feet wide.A basketball court is 94 feet long and 50 feet wide.Taking width first, because most fans are seated on the sides, there's only a 35 foot difference. Assuming the permanent seats run right up to the edge of the hockey rink, for basketball the seats would be 17.5 feet (about 2.5 Zekes) from the edge of the court on each side. Isn't that about the amount of space left between the court and seats of a dedicated basketball arena where teams and the media sit? If so, then there would be no big difference.Length is where there's a more significant difference -- 106 feet to be exact. Again, assuming the permanent seats run right up to the edge of the hockey rink, that means 53 feet at each end between the court and the seats. So there would need to be maybe about 35 feet (8-10 rows) of moveable seating at the ends to fill in that gap between the court and the permanent seats. I'm guessing the best multi-use arenas have pretty seemless modular seating arrangements at the ends where a section can be easily removed for hockey, and when in place for basketball would be virtually indistiguishable from the permanent, unmoveable seats.Is that about right, or does someone else see it a little differently?

[Blue & Gold]

Another article from today's (10/20/11) ABJ.

[Blue & Gold]

Why don't we look at the dimensions of hockey rinks and basketball courts to get a better idea of exactly what it would take for an arena to accomodate both:A hockey rink is 200 feet long and 85 feet wide.A basketball court is 94 feet long and 50 feet wide.Taking width first, because most fans are seated on the sides, there's only a 35 foot difference. Assuming the permanent seats run right up to the edge of the hockey rink, for basketball the seats would be 17.5 feet (about 2.5 Zekes) from the edge of the court on each side. Isn't that about the amount of space left between the court and seats of a dedicated basketball arena where teams and the media sit? If so, then there would be no big difference.Length is where there's a more significant difference -- 106 feet to be exact. Again, assuming the permanent seats run right up to the edge of the hockey rink, that means 53 feet at each end between the court and the seats. So there would need to be maybe about 35 feet (8-10 rows) of moveable seating at the ends to fill in that gap between the court and the permanent seats. I'm guessing the best multi-use arenas have pretty seemless modular seating arrangements at the ends where a section can be easily removed for hockey, and when in place for basketball would be virtually indistiguishable from the permanent, unmoveable seats.Is that about right, or does someone else see it a little differently?

That sounds about right. The side-view seats aren't the problem I have with hockey arenas. It's the endzone seating - which is terribly far removed from the action when it comes to viewing basketball.

[tbozeglav]

honestly... i dont think this arena gets built unless its capable of hosting a multitude of events, including hockey. Theres simply no way unless the University builds it, and I think at this point we can all agree thats not going to happen. Can someone explain to me, though, why making an arena "hockey capable" somehow significantly detracts from the sightlines of a basketball game? Honestly, ive been to basketball events at Quicken Loans Arena (which we all know can host hockey as well) and the seating behind each basket isnt bad AT ALL. In fact, I could honestly say its almost as good as the seating along each sideline. Bear in mind that the section behind one of the baskets would obviously be reserved for students, and at least part of the other would be for the pep band, so youre honestly only concerned about maybe 100 seats behind the basket. Based on what ive personally seen at a few arenas, the seating behind the basket, when the arena is built for multi-purpose, isnt that bad at all. If my intuitions are correct and some of you are thinking there'd be "gaps" behind each basket, I think youre further from the truth than you believe. I don't think ive seen many arenas do that (though ive been wrong before); instead they do what the more "professional" arenas do and have pull-out seating that fills those gaps.

[Dave in Green]

..... The side-view seats aren't the problem I have with hockey arenas. It's the endzone seating - which is terribly far removed from the action when it comes to viewing basketball.

Wouldn't that depend on whether the arena was optimized for hockey or basketball?If optimized for hockey, the endzone seating would come down to floor level at the ends of the longer hockey rink, leaving big gaps at each end for the shorter basketball court. As basketball fans, all of us would be against this.If optimized for basketball, the endzone seating would come down to floor level at the ends of the shorter basketball court. For hockey games you'd take out a modular section of 8-10 rows at each end, so the endzone seating for hockey would only come down to about the 9th-11th row level and not all the way to the floor.I think it's a given that you would optimize an Akron arena for basketball rather than hockey as basketball is bigger than hockey in Akron. So the net result would be seating comparable to a dedicated basketball arena with slightly compromised endzone seating for hockey.Seems like the best of both worlds to me to optimize it for basketball while giving it the flexibility to host multiple activities that would result in enough business to make it a good investment for the whole community.

[Doug Snyder]

..... The side-view seats aren't the problem I have with hockey arenas. It's the endzone seating - which is terribly far removed from the action when it comes to viewing basketball.

Wouldn't that depend on whether the arena was optimized for hockey or basketball?If optimized for hockey, the endzone seating would come down to floor level at the ends of the longer hockey rink, leaving big gaps at each end for the shorter basketball court. As basketball fans, all of us would be against this.If optimized for basketball, the endzone seating would come down to floor level at the ends of the shorter basketball court. For hockey games you'd take out a modular section of 8-10 rows at each end, so the endzone seating for hockey would only come down to about the 9th-11th row level and not all the way to the floor.I think it's a given that you would optimize an Akron arena for basketball rather than hockey as basketball is bigger than hockey in Akron. So the net result would be seating comparable to a dedicated basketball arena with slightly compromised endzone seating for hockey.Seems like the best of both worlds to me to optimize it for basketball while giving it the flexibility to host multiple activities that would result in enough business to make it a good investment for the whole community.

The more likely solution would be to push the end zone seats into a recessed area under the second level so the seats remain at floor level. You would create a 8 foot wall at each end but the seats would be floor level. You could also add a removable row or 2 on the sides to make the fans closer...but that would make the first row of hockey seats elevated by a couple of feet....not really a bad idea. The arena MUST be optimized and be GREAT for basketball because we have basketball. There is no hockey and the UofA will never have a team (not in the lifetime of any arena). Will the city get a minor league hockey team?? Doubtful. Who would incur the additional costs for the iced floor?? And the additional costs for the change over after events?? Lots of costs and a diminished arena just to be able to accomodate club hockey. Miami built a HOCKEY arean and pays the coach 250k+. Think $$$$ and if you are not ready to put your own hand in your own pocket...move on from this idea.IMHO the city of Akron would be far better served to make a GREAT basketball arena NOW and steal Canton's NBA D league team. That would be rather easy as the facilities in Canton suck. We are on the clock for this option.But no matter what...build a GREAT basketball arena

[Dave in Green]

Good idea on the endzone seating, Doug. I think there are multiple solutions that would work to start with the concept of an arena optimized for basketball, and then modify the design for multi-use without compromising the basketball optimization. I think the concern of some people is based on poorly designed multi-use facilities where basketball wasn't given primary consideration. A poor design would be unacceptable to all of us.