Memorial Stadium

Status
Not open for further replies.
#176      
@fuddrules Thank you for reposting. I am no expert in this field, but I have two questions that come up...

1) If debt is ALREADY tied to renovations for Memorial Stadium, this would not seem to stop us from expressing a PLAN or the renovation of the Horseshoe. This sadly says to me that it is not even a priority WITHIN the topic of MS renovations...

2) Many of the other programs around us have still done massively successful renovations recently ... those require debt, right? Iowa is in our neighborhood and their end zone renovation is regularly championed here as a model example.

1. They have done this in the past and then......it flopped. I'm sure the next time the process is publicized it will be further along than a hope. The plan itself also cost quite a bit of money.

2. I don't follow with that detail what other B1G's are doing with their facilities for the non-major sports. But I do know, Illinois has more debt (or had) than other B1G's. You can't wish the debt away.

Maybe a mega donor will step up. There are a few out there. Otherwise, it's going to be a while
 
#177      
Below is AI generated, but I kept iterating on the results on I got something I felt looked imposing and could fit well with the existing architecture. I think this may work better for the NEZ though. Both the NEZ and SEZ are garbage. (Love the video screen btw, haha...I didn't ask for that part. Perhaps it's a sign? ;))
View attachment 42767
Very unique and imposing, but kinda dark. The kind of stadium I would expect in Gotham City.
 
#178      
Below is AI generated, but I kept iterating on the results on I got something I felt looked imposing and could fit well with the existing architecture. I think this may work better for the NEZ though. Both the NEZ and SEZ are garbage. (Love the video screen btw, haha...I didn't ask for that part. Perhaps it's a sign? ;))
View attachment 42767
I can see BB on the video screen in his toga giving the thumbs up or thumbs down depending on the game situation.
 
#181      
If I'm not mistaken, Memorial stadium is now 102 yrs. old.
 
#182      
Below is AI generated, but I kept iterating on the results on I got something I felt looked imposing and could fit well with the existing architecture. I think this may work better for the NEZ though. Both the NEZ and SEZ are garbage. (Love the video screen btw, haha...I didn't ask for that part. Perhaps it's a sign? ;))
View attachment 42767
I love how AI can generate such a great image that really looks like it would fit perfectly with the architecture and aesthetics of the existing stadium, but it can't make a football field 100 yards long or even get the yard markers correct! 🤣 At any rate, I would definitely vote for this in either end zone or both!
 
#183      
It would be so nice if a donor would step up and just wipe out the athletic department debt.
Also would be great to give Shad his HD or anything he wants really.
The above rendering of either end zone is really cool and fits with the existing architecture. Would enhance crowd noise substantially.
My only note would be to remove the video screen at center. The arch depicted is beautiful. Maybe one big screen on top of the structure, spanning the full length. Or, two smaller screens on top of the structure.
And yeah, 'block Is' worked into the masonry too.
 
#184      
A video board in the NEZ will be great for those of us sitting in the horseshoe. Looking forward for a great year.
 
#185      
I had some time last night and this morning to sketch some potential Memorial Stadium improvement layouts. Yes these are in MS Paint, I do not know how to use Photoshop and I do not use image generators, probably weird to hear that from a Millennial. All setups assume that the ESL will be redeveloped to have premium seats like WSL, thank you again @Figher of the Nightman for the image below, and some kind of enclosure for the SEZ, like the ~2014 rendering, to create a completed facility. I also mirror the request to have the final design have a capacity of 70k to 80k.

Pano Reno 1.png

Screenshot 2025-04-19 194248.jpg


NEZ Structure, SEZ Horseshoe
After finishing with the ESL, the next phase will be to tear down the SEZ Horseshoe and replace it a new 60-70 row horse that is closer to the back of the endzone. The scoreboard (maroon) can stay in the SEZ and then a curving colonnade (green) will connect behind the horseshoe and either connect or nearly connect with the southern towers. The space between the columns can either be open and have Illinois branded banners or smaller videoboards for advertisements/announcements. The orange area will be filled in with the enclosed structure (restrooms/food vendors, Illini sports museum, etc. are options for this space).

The next phase would be to replace the NEZ with a tall structure to create a 'Wall' of fans. The Marching Illini will have a designated section (light orange/yellow) and there will be an option for premium seats (light blue) to be added in the future. Smaller videoboards (maroon) will be placed in the corners above/behind the seats. There will be a middle tunnel, so the team can run onto the field, and there will be corner tunnels (blue) for the opposing team and facility staff to use.

New Mem Stad 3.jpg


NEZ Horseshoe, SEZ Structure
Flipping the setup a bit from above, the horseshoe will be in the NEZ and SEZ will be the 'Wall'. The SEZ horseshoe will be replaced by the big structure first and the enclosed facilities (orange) will also be constructed. The corner passages (red) will be smaller that above; wide enough to let someone to walk through but not most machines, machines will have to use the center tunnel. The scoreboard (maroon) and colonnade (yellow) will be behind the seats.

The NEZ will then be rebuilt as a horseshoe with a central and corner tunnels. The MI will have a designated section (light orange/yellow), option to add premium seats (light blue), and secondary screens (maroon).

A farther future phase, potentially add a small upper deck about the NEZ horseshoe.

New Mem Stad.jpg


NEZ & SEZ Horseshoes (Bowl)
Merging some ideas from above, have a completed bowl by having both NEZ and SEZ horseshoes. Replace the SEZ first and then the NEZ. SEZ would have the main scoreboard (maroon) and side colonnades (green); the NEZ would have the MI (light orange/yellow), smaller videoboards (maroon), and option for premium seats (light blue). The NEZ could also have the option of a small upper deck further in the future.

New Mem Stad 2.jpg


What are your thoughts? Would someone be willing to create a more cleaned up version of these concepts? If I still had my 3D CAD software, I would do it myself but ...
 
#186      
Also, on the topic of whether or not we should expand seating, I had an interesting idea. OBVIOUSLY, a lot goes into how many fans a football program can draw, including its history of winning, how good it is currently, how close rival programs are, the student body/alumni population, etc. However, there is something to be said for the fact that you HAVE to rely on your "townie" population to fill a lot of those seats at the end of the day. So, I submit to you the following list of Big Ten schools that I consider to be in "similar college town environments" as Illinois. Are they all exactly the same?? No. For example, Ann Arbor is way closer to all of the Detroit MSA than Champaign is to anything that big. However, it is just an illustration.

Total MSA Population
Illinois: 242,453
Indiana: 162,553
Iowa: 182,711
Michigan: 373,875
Michigan State: 479,971
Nebraska: 350,626
Oregon: 382,396
Penn State: 159,805
Purdue: 229,701

And now those same schools' average attendance last season:

2024 Average Attendance
Illinois: 54,750
Indiana: 48,374
Iowa: 69,250
Michigan: 110,548
Michigan State: 65,307
Nebraska: 86,900
Oregon: 59,104
Penn State: 108,379
Purdue: 59,887

It's obvious that something like Penn State is a massive outlier here, but again just for fun/illustration purposes ... here is each of these schools' average attendance as a percentage of the total MSA population.

2024 Average Attendance / Total MSA Population (%)
Illinois: 22.6%
Indiana: 29.8%
Iowa: 37.9%
Michigan: 29.6%
Michigan State: 13.6%
Nebraska: 24.8%
Oregon: 15.5%
Penn State: 67.8%
Purdue: 26.1%

Looking at that list, I think especially reasonable comparisons for us long-term are Iowa, Purdue and Indiana (labeled "Comparable" below) ... roughly in that order. Here is what our average attendance would look like "recast" using the overall average for those schools (excluding PSU as an outlier) and with each of those schools' attendance ratios.

2024 Illinois Football Average Attendance Recast
Actual 2024: 54,750
Purdue Ratio: 63,207
Comparable Average Ratio: 70,505
Indiana Ratio: 72,154
Iowa Ratio: 91,890

TL;DR

The powers-that-be pretty much nailed it back in the day thinking that we should reasonably be filling at 70K-seat stadium, and the main trouble with us doing that is not anything structural or systemic ... it's that we have sucked. So, that is a very reasonable capacity goal within the next 10-15 years. These decision makers ALSO had every reason to believe that if Illinois football had taken off, we could have easily expanded to a stadium in the 80K range. I mean, put simply, if we drew attendance at the same "rate" as Iowa, we'd draw over 90K per game ... and we are actually EXTREMELY comparable to Iowa (and probably even enjoy MORE built-in advantages for a higher attendance!!) other than the fact that they have a few decades of being good under their belts, and we have a few decades of being terrible under ours. I also don't want to hear about "no pro sports in Iowa," because I have lived there and that is a BS excuse on our end. Central Illinois has rabidly supported Illini basketball for decades, and it would have done the same for a football program worth watching. Also, it's not like people in Iowa don't love pro sports! Everyone has time for both, lol.
 
#187      
Lol, thank you ... and yes, behind getting our basketball program the uniforms it deserves, this is probably my biggest Illini-related passion at the moment! It's just such a shame, because it's not like we are putting lipstick on a pig ... Memorial Stadium has the kind of potential that is extremely rare, and it just needs attention. We have such a gift, and we are somewhat wasting it. Right now, I feel like MS is treasured by Illini fans, and non-Illini fans are about split between "it's the definition of meh" and "parts of it actually have really cool architecture, it's kind of underrated!" However, that is really not good enough. A stadium with its history should have Wrigley Field status, where even visiting and rival fans can appreciate it as a cathedral to the sport. Unfortunately, we have the equivalent of a Wrigley Field that was never finished in 100 years of usage, haha. And it sucks, and I want it fixed so Memorial Stadium can take its rightful place as a truly iconic venue!

Regarding the announced "enhancements" or whatever, I am really curious to see where they put these video boards. I was actually thinking the other day that while the towers are easily the coolest feature of Memorial Stadium, it is kind of unfortunate they are parallel to the east/west stands. If I could wave a magic wand, we would transport all four into the "corners" of the stadium, and we could have a "squared-in" setup like Hard Rock Stadium. I feel like it would be SO cool if the towers were in the spaces of the video boards in the below pictures, and we could have video boards on top of all four and add architecturally matching upper deck stands to the south and north sides:

hard-rock-stadium-091121_4lieurwnsa9g18ayt45eelw42.jpg

960x0.jpg


Too tired to try to make that visual a reality in MS paint, haha. The basic idea, though, is that we want all corners filled in somehow. To its credit, the 2016 renovation plan would have indeed accomplished this, at least on the south side. However, this picture does a good job of showing how it would be way easier if you could just rotate those towers a bit, lol.

Illni-Football-1024x620.jpg
Live in Georgia now. Several years ago, my next door neighbor (Dawg fan) traveled to Chicago on business. As he likes to visit college football stadiums, he took the opportunity to drive down to Champaign to see ours. He told me that he was very impressed by the grandeur off the exterior. The use of brick and especially the columns. He was less impressed with the inside. Said the sideline stands were fine but the end zones were a disappointment (used different words not suitable for mixed company). I told him all Illini fans agree. If it was up to me, I wouldn't spend another dollar on gameday enhancements until the end zones are renovated to look like the picture above or better where possible.
 
#189      
Engineers - how deep does a lowered field need to go? What would it cost to lower the field 10’ to 12’? Water table considerations, drainage, retaining walls, structural work to prevent the stadium from sliding into the field — not cheap but a necessary first step and probably something that doesn’t necessarily have to wait for the reconstruction of the south and north end-zone structures.
 
#190      
Engineers - how deep does a lowered field need to go? What would it cost to lower the field 10’ to 12’? Water table considerations, drainage, retaining walls, structural work to prevent the stadium from sliding into the field — not cheap but a necessary first step and probably something that doesn’t necessarily have to wait for the reconstruction of the south and north end-zone structures.
I think 10-12 is a minimum . maybe 16 ft .
it’s a major deal and you don’t do it without doing the sideline seating and end zone work

I can’t see how it’s just done on its own . pretty sure all the things that need to done to MS have to be wrapped into one big project that will take 18-22 months to do .

lots of money and a huge commitment . we need a few years of sellouts first and a huge influx of donor money

and we don’t even know if Josh & UI Admin are even on board with lowering the field due to a few factors .
 
Last edited:
#192      
That would be perfect. We could make the final game of the season Bring Your Jack Day and after the game everyone could put their jack in a selected spot and start jacking. 50,000 or so jacks ought to move it a bit. I'll watch from a safe distance though. Can't be too careful.
 
#193      
I’ll be happy with anything at this point, as long as it includes widening the seat space allotment in each existing row. Cutting out a couple seats a row to give people more room is probably the easiest game experience improvement the DIA could make.
 
#194      
Engineers - how deep does a lowered field need to go? What would it cost to lower the field 10’ to 12’? Water table considerations, drainage, retaining walls, structural work to prevent the stadium from sliding into the field — not cheap but a necessary first step and probably something that doesn’t necessarily have to wait for the reconstruction of the south and north end-zone structures.
It's been a couple years since I was inside MS but architects and engineers would need to check sight lines to understand how much the playing surface could potentially be lowered. If I remember correctly, the lower 'bowl' rise over run is roughly 1 to 3. The sideline seating wall is roughly 50 ft from the field sideline, so we would need to factor that in. The upper deck is steeper, and I do not have an estimated rise/run, but I remember being able to see most of the sideline space with the current setup. Depending upon where the viewing angles would fall, that may allow the field to be lowered a few to 10+ ft. Lowering the field should allow the tarped off rows between the 30s to be used and maybe even allow a few new rows to be added, bringing the crowd closer behind the team benches.

As for structural requirements to reduce the possibility of the sidelines sliding inward, it will depend upon the applied forces of the lower seating rows. If forces are primarily downward, then the sidelines may only require minor shoring to prevent soil from shifting and eroding support. An idea that is coming to mind now might be to remove the lower 25ish rows and replace them with 30ish rows, bringing the sideline rows closer to the team benches, and having the space now below the seats as available storage.

As for groundwater, that is a major concern in Central Illinois, as you can hit the watertable after digging less than a foot down in many places. Stories say that there is a 1920s bulldozer under MS's field due to getting stuck, potentially from digging below the original watertable and finding wet/soft soil. If the sidelines are properly shored up and the field is dug up and lowered, then extensive drainage systems would be placed under the field to maintain proper moisture levels.

Another thing to consider is the impact on other stadium related facilities. The locker rooms would likely be lowered X ft and the truck bay for the visiting team's equipment would also need to be lowered. So, lowering the field may require removing and replacing the NEZ structure at the same time.

If the field were to be lowered, Illinois would likely need to find a temporary home for a season or two. Would we be like Hawaii and temporarily upgrade our soccer/track stadium and use it? Or, would we play at other stadiums, like Soldier Field, Hancock Stadium (Illinois State), or O'Brien Field (Eastern Illinois)?

What are others' thoughts?
 
#195      
It's been a couple years since I was inside MS but architects and engineers would need to check sight lines to understand how much the playing surface could potentially be lowered. If I remember correctly, the lower 'bowl' rise over run is roughly 1 to 3. The sideline seating wall is roughly 50 ft from the field sideline, so we would need to factor that in. The upper deck is steeper, and I do not have an estimated rise/run, but I remember being able to see most of the sideline space with the current setup. Depending upon where the viewing angles would fall, that may allow the field to be lowered a few to 10+ ft. Lowering the field should allow the tarped off rows between the 30s to be used and maybe even allow a few new rows to be added, bringing the crowd closer behind the team benches.

As for structural requirements to reduce the possibility of the sidelines sliding inward, it will depend upon the applied forces of the lower seating rows. If forces are primarily downward, then the sidelines may only require minor shoring to prevent soil from shifting and eroding support. An idea that is coming to mind now might be to remove the lower 25ish rows and replace them with 30ish rows, bringing the sideline rows closer to the team benches, and having the space now below the seats as available storage.

As for groundwater, that is a major concern in Central Illinois, as you can hit the water table after digging less than a foot down in many places. Stories say that there is a 1920s bulldozer under MS's field due to getting stuck, potentially from digging below the original water table and finding wet/soft soil. If the sidelines are properly shored up and the field is dug up and lowered, then extensive drainage systems would be placed under the field to maintain proper moisture levels.

Another thing to consider is the impact on other stadium related facilities. The locker rooms would likely be lowered X ft and the truck bay for the visiting team's equipment would also need to be lowered. So, lowering the field may require removing and replacing the NEZ structure at the same time.

If the field were to be lowered, Illinois would likely need to find a temporary home for a season or two. Would we be like Hawaii and temporarily upgrade our soccer/track stadium and use it? Or, would we play at other stadiums, like Soldier Field, Hancock Stadium (Illinois State), or O'Brien Field (Eastern Illinois)?

What are others' thoughts?
I am utterly unqualified to speak on any of the engineering questions. To your last question, however, I would have to think we will use other full-size football stadia. Especially after the general mocking of the NU home field during the Dyche remodeling, but also needing that revenue.

I just don't think there will be appetite for such major changes for a long time, though, even if we keep winning at a decent pace. Very intrusive, very expensive, and don't we have the 4th largest debt level at the college level?
 
#196      
I am utterly unqualified to speak on any of the engineering questions. To your last question, however, I would have to think we will use other full-size football stadia. Especially after the general mocking of the NU home field during the Dyche remodeling, but also needing that revenue.

I just don't think there will be appetite for such major changes for a long time, though, even if we keep winning at a decent pace. Very intrusive, very expensive, and don't we have the 4th largest debt level at the college level?
hopefully , Josh is quietly getting donor promises right now . I think any construction is still 4-5 years off . fully agree that any conference or P4 non con game needs to happen at SF or WF (maybe one game in Nov ) . we will need to move out for one season. maybe just hold all games at SF . Bears will be out of there by then
 
Last edited:
#197      
I am utterly unqualified to speak on any of the engineering questions. To your last question, however, I would have to think we will use other full-size football stadia. Especially after the general mocking of the NU home field during the Dyche remodeling, but also needing that revenue.

I just don't think there will be appetite for such major changes for a long time, though, even if we keep winning at a decent pace. Very intrusive, very expensive, and don't we have the 4th largest debt level at the college level?
The debts are a big concern and I too hope that the DIA has them under control. There are likely donors lined up to cover some of the costs via annual/periodic payments but the UI has to carry the bonds until those monies come in.

As for the potential grandiose improvements to MS, I personally see them as a thought experiment among this forum and its members. The stadium will eventually need to be renovated again and it is fun to speculate what might happen and explore possible ideas as a group.
 
#198      
I lived in ISR when they were building Krannert and I remember the pssss-WHANK pssss-WHANK pssss-WHANK of the piledriver all day long for seemingly all year. I wonder how deep they had to go for solid footing there? And how about the luxury highrises that ate campus town? Surely they had to deal with the water table.

Re where we would play our home games during any construction that would prevent playing at Memorial Stadium? ISU and EIU stadia just don't have anywhere near the capacity, especially if the anticipated success of the football team is what is inspiring the stadium upgrade due to increased attendance. Soldier Field would likely be the only place that could hold the fans. Please, no Northwestern fiasco. Of course, it woiuld be picking up the team and essentially playing an away game in Chicago. And that said, special trains--like in olden times--to take the students to the games? It is their football team after all.
 
#200      
I’ll be happy with anything at this point, as long as it includes widening the seat space allotment in each existing row. Cutting out a couple seats a row to give people more room is probably the easiest game experience improvement the DIA could make.
I bought five tickets for my family of four partially for the extra space. Allows the possibility of bringing an extra person to a couple of games too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back