It's location in the literal shadow of Clifton Robinson is really strange. It looks like a zoning error currently.Vae Victis said:
Kim Mulkey was right, the location is stupid.
Is this true for the opening of Foster?
9,502 Views |
100 Replies |
Last: 10 mo ago by MrGolfguy
Aw C'mon people! Y'all never been to a "Willie's Picnic?"ScottS said:
No team bathrooms? What are they gonna do, run to the convenience store down the street?
The location is great! A showcase for Baylor. Just like McLane.
with the Cliff Robinson tower (or whatever it is called today) sitting right in front of it - looks stupid.Vae Victis said:
Kim Mulkey was right, the location is stupid.
don't run buses.....put together some boat trollers and run them from Ferrell center down the river and drop people off...
Until one of you complainers puts up the money to build a new administration building, CRT will remain.
Why is everything about $$ with you.
It's a message board. Believe it or not everyone's allowed an opinion
It's a message board. Believe it or not everyone's allowed an opinion
IowaBear said:
Why is everything about $$ with you.
It's a message board. Believe it or not everyone's allowed an opinion
And, everyone is allowed to call out stupid opinions.
Vae Victis said:
Kim Mulkey was right, the location is stupid.
The location is fantastic.
- highly visible next to I-35 with 20 million people streaming past it every year
- 5 mins walk to bars and restaurants, eventually will have two more within 1 minute
- will eventually have video boards up on the parking garage creating a Victory Park feel
- closer to student dorms than Ferrell
- greater connection to Waco community
- not hidden in the back of the university where it is only noticed on gameday
- not surrounded by a sea of asphalt
Kim was a great coach for us but really let us down on this argument.
Build new admin. turn Clifton into hotel
Not if you're driving North on 35. Then it's hidden behind a mediocre building that's concerningly close to one that's supposed to be a showcase.CTbruin said:
The location is great! A showcase for Baylor. Just like McLane.
And the southbound view is the butt of the building.
The decision-making was weird. If you were going to put Foster there, it should have been with the expectation that the Clifton Robinson Tower come down.
It looks goofy hidden behind the Clifton Robinson Tower. It's OK to admit it.Edmond Bear said:Vae Victis said:
Kim Mulkey was right, the location is stupid.
The location is fantastic.
- highly visible next to I-35 with 20 million people streaming past it every year
- 5 mins walk to bars and restaurants, eventually will have two more within 1 minute
- will eventually have video boards up on the parking garage creating a Victory Park feel
- closer to student dorms than Ferrell
- greater connection to Waco community
- not hidden in the back of the university where it is only noticed on gameday
- not surrounded by a sea of asphalt
Kim was a great coach for us but really let us down on this argument.
Facility and court look better than I expected. Looks like they are using the lighter green on the court which is probably the shade all sports teams should be using. Looks way better. A bit too small (should have been 8k) but not bad.
The proximity of the admin building is crazy. Looks to be a terrible layout. Now if they're working on getting the building scrapped.. that's fine. But should have been resolved before. Once/If the admin building gets removed.. will look really good.
The proximity of the admin building is crazy. Looks to be a terrible layout. Now if they're working on getting the building scrapped.. that's fine. But should have been resolved before. Once/If the admin building gets removed.. will look really good.
bear2be2 said:Not if you're driving North on 35. Then it's hidden behind a mediocre building that's concerningly close to one that's supposed to be a showcase.CTbruin said:
The location is great! A showcase for Baylor. Just like McLane.
And the southbound view is the butt of the building.
The decision-making was weird. If you were going to put Foster there, it should have been with the expectation that the Clifton Robinson Tower come down.
I'm sure Make Rhoades is willing to take your check to pay for that office space to 1) come down and 2) be replaced somewhere else.
The aesthetics crowd acts like there is unlimited resources to 1) add to NIL, 2) buyout Aranda, 3) add the best OC/DCs, 4) a million other things. I gotta think aesthetics is way way way down the list of priorities. Sh*t, I hope it is or you'll have a huge section of the donor class wonder why you are so willing to waste donor funds.
If you guys want to Robinson down, you'll have to fund it. Until then, you sound like a child crying on Christmas that your shiny toy is not shiny enough.
We're free to have opinions without donating millions to a university to waste tearing down perfectly functional buildings to build new ones they'll be tearing down or repurposing 25 years from now.Edmond Bear said:bear2be2 said:Not if you're driving North on 35. Then it's hidden behind a mediocre building that's concerningly close to one that's supposed to be a showcase.CTbruin said:
The location is great! A showcase for Baylor. Just like McLane.
And the southbound view is the butt of the building.
The decision-making was weird. If you were going to put Foster there, it should have been with the expectation that the Clifton Robinson Tower come down.
I'm sure Make Rhoades is willing to take your check to pay for that office space to 1) come down and 2) be replaced somewhere else.
The aesthetics crowd acts like there is unlimited resources to 1) add to NIL, 2) buyout Aranda, 3) add the best OC/DCs, 4) a million other things. I gotta think aesthetics is way way way down the list of priorities. Sh*t, I hope it is or you'll have a huge section of the donor class wonder why you are so willing to waste donor funds.
If you guys want to Robinson down, you'll have to fund it. Until then, you sound like a child crying on Christmas that your shiny toy is not shiny enough.
Foster will be very nice inside. The exterior layout looks like a half-assed, incomplete effort that was shoehorned into a space too small for the facility.
If the school doesn't want to hear those critiques, it should steward its funds and plan its facilities better.
As alums and fans, we're not required to suspend our disbelief or defend everything the university does.
And if you want to make a function argument, fine. This new facility will be very functional and exceptionally nice from the inside.
The problem is you and CT want to defend the aesthetics, too, talking about what a great showcase it will be in that location when the fact is those driving on 35 will either see the back of the building or Clifton Robinson Tower.
From a university showcase standpoint, it's a goofy setup, plain and simple. You won't lose your Baylor fan card if you admit it.
The problem is you and CT want to defend the aesthetics, too, talking about what a great showcase it will be in that location when the fact is those driving on 35 will either see the back of the building or Clifton Robinson Tower.
From a university showcase standpoint, it's a goofy setup, plain and simple. You won't lose your Baylor fan card if you admit it.
bear2be2 said:We're free to have opinions without donating millions to a university to waste tearing down perfectly functional buildings to build new ones they'll be tearing down or repurposing 25 years from now.Edmond Bear said:bear2be2 said:Not if you're driving North on 35. Then it's hidden behind a mediocre building that's concerningly close to one that's supposed to be a showcase.CTbruin said:
The location is great! A showcase for Baylor. Just like McLane.
And the southbound view is the butt of the building.
The decision-making was weird. If you were going to put Foster there, it should have been with the expectation that the Clifton Robinson Tower come down.
I'm sure Make Rhoades is willing to take your check to pay for that office space to 1) come down and 2) be replaced somewhere else.
The aesthetics crowd acts like there is unlimited resources to 1) add to NIL, 2) buyout Aranda, 3) add the best OC/DCs, 4) a million other things. I gotta think aesthetics is way way way down the list of priorities. Sh*t, I hope it is or you'll have a huge section of the donor class wonder why you are so willing to waste donor funds.
If you guys want to Robinson down, you'll have to fund it. Until then, you sound like a child crying on Christmas that your shiny toy is not shiny enough.
Foster will be very nice inside. The exterior layout looks like a half-assed, incomplete effort that was shoehorned into a space too small for the facility.
If the school doesn't want to hear those critiques, it should steward its funds and plan its facilities better.
As alums and fans, we're not required to suspend our disbelief or defend everything the university does.
No one is asking you to suspend disbelief. But, I think people would expect you have opinions with context, especially obvious ones like money. You are free to have your opinion but you should not expect that your opinion is not open to criticism.
You may not realize it, but people who work hard to bring Foster to life, and donors who contribute to make Foster happen, read this board. They have provided a gorgeous facility on a river, near a downtown with bars and restaurants, that is still walkable to students and provided a facility nearly every other school would love to have...and then people come along and say it looks half-assed. You can imagine, it's kinda shi*ty.
bear2be2 said:
And if you want to make a function argument, fine. This new facility will be very functional and exceptionally nice from the inside.
The problem is you and CT want to defend the aesthetics, too, talking about what a great showcase it will be in that location when the fact is those driving on 35 will either see the back of the building or Clifton Robinson Tower.
From a university showcase standpoint, it's a goofy setup, plain and simple. You won't lose your Baylor fan card if you admit it.
Foster is much larger than Robinson and it's so close to I-35, you can see in the windows. There is no doubt it's Baylor. It's placement across from McLane and Hurd means Baylor straddles an interstate that carries 20 million people per year. I cannot think of another university anywhere that has that kind of free visibility. Foster's placement is a great branding effort.
Foster is next to a downtown, a 5 minute walk to several bars and restaurants, and there are two more planned next to Foster. That makes Foster great for fans to essentially tailgate before the game and make the game more of a party. It is also walkable to students. That is great placement.
Foster is next to a river with a deck for coaches and players that overlooks the river. There is nothing like it. That is great placement.
Robinson is there, blocking part of the view from one side of I-35 and the placement looks goofy to alot people.
It costs money to knock down a building and replace that space somewhere else.
All of those are true and all of it is context.
To come on here, ignore context, and say, it looks goofy and people should be willing to be criticized for it. That's shi*ty.
could be an opportunity for the rickshaw pilots of Huaco:
- KKM
- KKM
pro ecclesia, pro javelina
Quinton said:
Facility and court look better than I expected. Looks like they are using the lighter green on the court which is probably the shade all sports teams should be using. Looks way better. A bit too small (should have been 8k) but not bad.
The proximity of the admin building is crazy. Looks to be a terrible layout. Now if they're working on getting the building scrapped.. that's fine. But should have been resolved before. Once/If the admin building gets removed.. will look really good.
Anyone talk to Cliff Robinson about scrapping his tower?
Edmond Bear said:bear2be2 said:
And if you want to make a function argument, fine. This new facility will be very functional and exceptionally nice from the inside.
The problem is you and CT want to defend the aesthetics, too, talking about what a great showcase it will be in that location when the fact is those driving on 35 will either see the back of the building or Clifton Robinson Tower.
From a university showcase standpoint, it's a goofy setup, plain and simple. You won't lose your Baylor fan card if you admit it.
Foster is much larger than Robinson and it's so close to I-35, you can see in the windows. There is no doubt it's Baylor. It's placement across from McLane and Hurd means Baylor straddles an interstate that carries 20 million people per year. I cannot think of another university anywhere that has that kind of free visibility. Foster's placement is a great branding effort.
Foster is next to a downtown, a 5 minute walk to several bars and restaurants, and there are two more planned next to Foster. That makes Foster great for fans to essentially tailgate before the game and make the game more of a party. It is also walkable to students. That is great placement.
Foster is next to a river with a deck for coaches and players that overlooks the river. There is nothing like it. That is great placement.
Robinson is there, blocking part of the view from one side of I-35 and the placement looks goofy to alot people.
It costs money to knock down a building and replace that space somewhere else.
All of those are true and all of it is context.
To come on here, ignore context, and say, it looks goofy and people should be willing to be criticized for it. That's shi*ty.
It costs surprisingly little to Demolish a building relative to what people generally think
No clue who owns the tower these days or the long term plan.
At the moment it looks way out of place. Maybe that's just how it will be. Has anyone involved in "bringing Foster to life" explained the longer term plan? Do they like the lack of city planning look it has?
To me, it is what it is and baylor does tons of ruhtarded stuff so I wouldn't lose sleep
Over it but they all seem like fair questions
I doubt if anyone reading this board that made any significant financial commitments to foster gives half a **** what some keyboard warrior thinks. They should just mentally tell those people to pound sand
Meanwhile, us minions should continue to say whatever we want
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Psalm 119:36
Probably same folks that talked to Casey family.Fre3dombear said:Quinton said:
Facility and court look better than I expected. Looks like they are using the lighter green on the court which is probably the shade all sports teams should be using. Looks way better. A bit too small (should have been 8k) but not bad.
The proximity of the admin building is crazy. Looks to be a terrible layout. Now if they're working on getting the building scrapped.. that's fine. But should have been resolved before. Once/If the admin building gets removed.. will look really good.
Anyone talk to Cliff Robinson about scrapping his tower?
And ... ???Edmond Bear said:bear2be2 said:We're free to have opinions without donating millions to a university to waste tearing down perfectly functional buildings to build new ones they'll be tearing down or repurposing 25 years from now.Edmond Bear said:bear2be2 said:Not if you're driving North on 35. Then it's hidden behind a mediocre building that's concerningly close to one that's supposed to be a showcase.CTbruin said:
The location is great! A showcase for Baylor. Just like McLane.
And the southbound view is the butt of the building.
The decision-making was weird. If you were going to put Foster there, it should have been with the expectation that the Clifton Robinson Tower come down.
I'm sure Make Rhoades is willing to take your check to pay for that office space to 1) come down and 2) be replaced somewhere else.
The aesthetics crowd acts like there is unlimited resources to 1) add to NIL, 2) buyout Aranda, 3) add the best OC/DCs, 4) a million other things. I gotta think aesthetics is way way way down the list of priorities. Sh*t, I hope it is or you'll have a huge section of the donor class wonder why you are so willing to waste donor funds.
If you guys want to Robinson down, you'll have to fund it. Until then, you sound like a child crying on Christmas that your shiny toy is not shiny enough.
Foster will be very nice inside. The exterior layout looks like a half-assed, incomplete effort that was shoehorned into a space too small for the facility.
If the school doesn't want to hear those critiques, it should steward its funds and plan its facilities better.
As alums and fans, we're not required to suspend our disbelief or defend everything the university does.
No one is asking you to suspend disbelief. But, I think people would expect you have opinions with context, especially obvious ones like money. You are free to have your opinion but you should not expect that your opinion is not open to criticism.
You may not realize it, but people who work hard to bring Foster to life, and donors who contribute to make Foster happen, read this board. They have provided a gorgeous facility on a river, near a downtown with bars and restaurants, that is still walkable to students and provided a facility nearly every other school would love to have...and then people come along and say it looks half-assed. You can imagine, it's kinda shi*ty.
It's their money and they can choose to spend it how they want. I have no obligation whatsoever to kiss their asses. That's the university administration's job, not mine.
The setup looks stupid. I'm sorry. It does.
There is no way in hell we'd build two buildings that close to each other and have an office building blocking the view of our gem of a basketball facility if we were building from scratch. It looks silly.
Some are too young to remember that the original Master Plan was a hotel in that corner and Foster next to it. With a hotel obviously not happening, they crammed the FP in there. It will suck this year, but getting to it in fall '24 and beyond will be awesome. Remember too, that the arena is an indoor facility so the outside asthethics mean less tha it does at McLane.
This happened in the Spring of 1999.Task Force 2015 said:
Over 20 years ago I believe we hosted a NCAA baseball subregional before the Baylor Ballpark was completed.My recollection (I wasn't there)was that seats were not yet installed so the spectators had to sit on the concrete tiers.We caught some flak over that.
I remember the master plan for McClane Stadium had a giant Crystal Palace event center looking thing next to it that would have been awesome. I don't remember the pre-construction drawings too well, but the blueprints never match the as-builts in these types of projects. It's fine to criticize the aesthetics of it. That's valid. Many people think that McClane Stadium looks like a toilet bowl from a Birdseye view. It's also fine to say that beggars can't be choosers. It is kind of ironic that people will complain about lack of growth in Waco and then complain about the aesthetic of having buildings in you know…downtown…. Where you typically expect buildings to be. But to each their own. I wish construction projects would work like the old SimCity game, but they don't
This has got to be one of the most divisive new stadiums ever. Seems like half (or more) people hate it without ever setting foot in it.
As to parking, give me a break. Go to pretty much any NFL game, MLB game and many college games and then complain about walking .25 or even .5 miles for parking.
As to parking, give me a break. Go to pretty much any NFL game, MLB game and many college games and then complain about walking .25 or even .5 miles for parking.
CTbruin said:
The location is great! A showcase for Baylor. Just like McLane.
I have had multiple coworkers over the years tell me about driving past McClane and mentioning how cool it looks. None of these people have any clue what the Ferrel Center or Floyd Casey Stadium is/was. Being located adjacent to a massive freeway has caused logistics issues with Baylor (not just the stadiums), but the exposure is second to none.
I'm not a giant fan of the location (I would have preferred on campus like Mulkey wanted) but I see both sides of the argument.No Quarterback said:CTbruin said:
The location is great! A showcase for Baylor. Just like McLane.
I have had multiple coworkers over the years tell me about driving past McClane and mentioning how cool it looks. None of these people have any clue what the Ferrel Center or Floyd Casey Stadium is/was. Being located adjacent to a massive freeway has caused logistics issues with Baylor (not just the stadiums), but the exposure is second to none.
The main benefit of this new arena is the location right off of I-35.
The view of McClane Stadium, the Brazos River, and the Foster Pavilion is an entirely new showcase of Baylor University and Waco, TX. This will be seen by thousands of motorist each day.
This would be true if you could actually see it from the highway. That currently isn't the case.No Quarterback said:CTbruin said:
The location is great! A showcase for Baylor. Just like McLane.
I have had multiple coworkers over the years tell me about driving past McClane and mentioning how cool it looks. None of these people have any clue what the Ferrel Center or Floyd Casey Stadium is/was. Being located adjacent to a massive freeway has caused logistics issues with Baylor (not just the stadiums), but the exposure is second to none.
Driving south on 35, you can see the back, which is nothing special. And driving north, it's blocked by the Clifton Robinson Tower.
I can only assume that the plan is to eventually tear down the tower. But until they do, it won't be the showcase some are trying to sell.
CTbruin said:
I don't know who these clowns are, but a lot of what they have to say is not true.
Let's talk after the game Tuesday when a lot of us will have first hand knowledge
I'm sure there will be some issues as there almost always are with new facilities, but I doubt the sky is falling like those 2 dudes are making it sound.
Facebook brings out the worst drama in some people.
The "back", with landscaping along the river, will be spectacular.
Doesn't amount to much....but everyone in the comments is asking why we didn't make it at least 10,000 seats and can't believe how small it is.
Baylor opens this palace tonight. 7500 seats. Looks like perfection, big enough and intimate enough… she’s a bute Clark pic.twitter.com/ouucnMEfU7
— Doug Gottlieb (@GottliebShow) January 2, 2024
"How dare they criticize my criticism."Edmond Bear said:bear2be2 said:
And if you want to make a function argument, fine. This new facility will be very functional and exceptionally nice from the inside.
The problem is you and CT want to defend the aesthetics, too, talking about what a great showcase it will be in that location when the fact is those driving on 35 will either see the back of the building or Clifton Robinson Tower.
From a university showcase standpoint, it's a goofy setup, plain and simple. You won't lose your Baylor fan card if you admit it.
Foster is much larger than Robinson and it's so close to I-35, you can see in the windows. There is no doubt it's Baylor. It's placement across from McLane and Hurd means Baylor straddles an interstate that carries 20 million people per year. I cannot think of another university anywhere that has that kind of free visibility. Foster's placement is a great branding effort.
Foster is next to a downtown, a 5 minute walk to several bars and restaurants, and there are two more planned next to Foster. That makes Foster great for fans to essentially tailgate before the game and make the game more of a party. It is also walkable to students. That is great placement.
Foster is next to a river with a deck for coaches and players that overlooks the river. There is nothing like it. That is great placement.
Robinson is there, blocking part of the view from one side of I-35 and the placement looks goofy to alot people.
It costs money to knock down a building and replace that space somewhere else.
All of those are true and all of it is context.
To come on here, ignore context, and say, it looks goofy and people should be willing to be criticized for it. That's shi*ty.
Don't forget Gottlieb played at Okie St when Gallagher-Iba only seated 6,300.boognish_bear said:
Doesn't amount to much....but everyone in the comments is asking why we didn't make it at least 10,000 seats and can't believe how small it is.Baylor opens this palace tonight. 7500 seats. Looks like perfection, big enough and intimate enough… she’s a bute Clark pic.twitter.com/ouucnMEfU7
— Doug Gottlieb (@GottliebShow) January 2, 2024
Featured Stories
See All
Breaking: Head Coach Dave Aranda To Officially Return For 2025 Season
by SicEm365 Staff
18:42
18h ago
2.4k
Rapid Reactions: Baylor Bowl Bound after Win at WVU
by Craig Smoak
Gameday Thread: No. 12 Baylor (2-1) Faces Tarleton (1-3)
by Ashley Hodge