Gies Memorial Stadium

[Dkayak]

.

I’m all for studying the back of the East Main, as an equal priority as the SEZ. Explore cutting the rows off at 43, like the West Main, and look at alternatives like AFFORDABLE open air “box” / platform seating with an emphasis on families and little ones who might enjoy a little extra space to roam around behind them. An added bonus of this, is that the top corners of the upper east main will likely become easier to fill out, as a result.

Sounds a lot like the plastic seats in Colonnades, with seat backs and generous width / pitch, unless you mean keeping the current benches? Colonnades also has space indoors for roaming or mingling, as well as excellent concessions. Better define “affordable”.

Perceived value and demand quickly increase as you reduce density. It’s tough to offer a small premium area at ordinary bleacher prices, unless you sell it via a lottery. Demand would swamp supply w/o a premium price. It’s wiser to align prices in all tiers with demand —- just high enough to sell everything out simultaneously for a popular game.

 

[IlliniNash]

I know I previously posted that even though this would be a total bare minimum fix, it would still be a massive improvement, at least aesthetically ... and I stand by that, as it really does do a shocking amount to make the Horseshoe (and therefore the stadium) look a little more complete, especially if you added seats behind, as well:

Current Horseshoe
View attachment 43689

New Seats in Front
View attachment 43690

New Seats in Front AND in Back
View attachment 43691

However, while these fixes would certainly tie the stadium together more effectively from a visual perspective, I now am thinking it would still be a H-U-G-E mistake for one very important reason - the gradual slope back of the Horseshoe is just not going to cut it for what we need in that area. I feel like there are three main goals with any SEZ renovation:
1) Include some type of revenue-generating seats that will help the renovation "pay for itself," or at least get some of the cost back.
2) Tie the stadium together aesthetically, as the current Horseshoe looks like we just stopped designing what was supposed to be an architecturally grand stadium.
3) More effectively trap noise to improve our gameday environment, mainly by (A) closing in the open space and (B) creating as much height as possible.

The fixes above do nothing to achieve Goal #1, and I think any renovation that keeps the current structure will have a difficult time adding in suites. They at least somewhat achieve Goal #2, even if they are still more underwhelming than other options. They also will do shockingly little (at least IMO) at achieving Goal #3, as we would be stuck with the current incline of the Horseshoe (while simply adding to it in front and in back), and the way it was built just does not lend itself to trapping noise or creating height.

We need whatever is built in the SEZ to have a slope closer to our East Balcony than what we have in the Horseshoe right now. If that involves a "break" in the seats between East/West Main and the new SEZ, that is okay!! There are plenty of ways we can artistically get around that and make it look good ... but we NEED a steeper incline there.

Compare these photos showing the rather steep incline of the East Balcony...

... compared to the much flatter incline of the Horseshoe, which looks to be even exaggerated compared to East and West Main!

I'm not an architect or engineer or whatever, so maybe we can keep elements of the structure and reorient the slope to be steeper ... but man, any "fix" to the SEZ that doesn't get those seats on a less gradual incline is a huge miss, as we need height in that area that is ideally creating a "wall of fans," as has been discussed.

Probably best to start over but I wonder what some kind of deck would look like. Maybe curved.

 

[STLini25]

Probably best to start over but I wonder what some kind of deck would look like. Maybe curved.

Whitman has previously stated to plan is to build a new structure.

 

[kmunt09]

Sounds a lot like the plastic seats in Colonnades, with seat backs and generous width / pitch, unless you mean keeping the current benches? Colonnades also has space indoors for roaming or mingling, as well as excellent concessions. Better define “affordable”.

Perceived value and demand quickly increase as you reduce density. It’s tough to offer a small premium area at ordinary bleacher prices, unless you sell it via a lottery. Demand would swamp supply w/o a premium price. It’s wiser to align prices in all tiers with demand —- just high enough to sell everything out simultaneously for a popular game.

Forgive me for not knowing the terminology of all of the suite areas. I simply mean something like this area shown, behind row 43 of the West Main. Open air seating, but perhaps the amenities behind it could be simplified so as to not have so many offerings that price many people out. Don’t need to include all inclusive concessions, etc.

I understand your point of reducing density. If the SEZ was redesigned to increase its capacity, I would think there would be room for a major decision like this on East Main.

I just don’t know how proud the University is to seat people in row 75 of the East Main - there is a way to improve the fan experience for those, I have to imagine.

 

[Dkayak]

View attachment 43703

Forgive me for not knowing the terminology of all of the suite areas. I simply mean something like this area shown, behind row 43 of the West Main. Open air seating, but perhaps the amenities behind it could be simplified so as to not have so many offerings that price many people out. Don’t need to include all inclusive concessions, etc.

I understand your point of reducing density. If the SEZ was redesigned to increase its capacity, I would think there would be room for a major decision like this on East Main.

I just don’t know how proud the University is to seat people in row 75 of the East Main - there is a way to improve the fan experience for those, I have to imagine.

That about what I thought you had in mind. BTW, concessions are in the enclosed area behind the Colonnades seats in your photo, but are not included. It seems Colonnades pricing is just a reflection of demand for low density, upgraded seats, and ready access to concessions (w/o much of a queue) in a climate controlled space.

 

[kmunt09]

That about what I thought you had in mind. BTW, concessions are in the enclosed area behind the Colonnades seats in your photo, but are not included. It seems Colonnades pricing is just a reflection of demand for low density, upgraded seats, and ready access to concessions (w/o much of a queue) in a climate controlled space.

Good to know, thanks for the info on their concessions. I just think it's worth studying congruently with the SEZ.

I can't imagine it wouldn't be in the University and fan's best interest to try to eliminate/improve the experience for those sitting in row 75 of the East Main.

 

[Battle89]

How long should a scoreboard last? It seems that we replace ours pretty regularly (2002, 2013).

Glad to see I'm not alone. Reading posts about black / burned-out sections on the board, etc., I'm always thinking "we just got that thing".

But I guess time flows by faster in my elder years.

 

[MikeTisdale]

How long should a scoreboard last? It seems that we replace ours pretty regularly (2002, 2013).

Pretty similar to any other piece of technology - 12 years is a long time, and the parts to address any problems start to not exist.

 

[Fighter of the Nightman]

Probably best to start over but I wonder what some kind of deck would look like. Maybe curved.

I think we can actually really get creative with the SEZ, and - as JW said - all options truly can be on the table. The main place where it is important to NOT have a curved setup is in front ... needless to say, any fix needs to have that first row of fans much, MUCH closer to the end zone than this, and a more "straight" first row is how we accomplish that.

With that said, we can arrange the section where the back is still curved, keeping the current shape. If you'll notice in the actual 2016 rendering, while the first row is straight and keeps fans closer to the end zone, the back still has a curved shape that somewhat extends farther back by the scoreboard and sort of angles back in by the towers:

I think there are definitely cool things we could do where we "square in" the lower rows to get them as close to the end zone as possible but then we put in an upper deck that keeps the "horseshoe shape" or whatever. As long as you can get the suites in the middle between the lower and upper decks (i.e., we would need the setup in West Main, not in East Main with seats underneath the balcony overhang), I think that could definitely be a winner!! My best shot at it ... try to imagine the columns actually ringing around the top and the upper deck as a clearly visible upper deck, lol...

I'd be game! I really, really, REALLY hope they go to great lengths to ensure the architecture of the SEZ compliments the rest of the stadium. I kind of hate how the back of the NEZ just has the backs of stairs visible and a rather bland style. And as much as people (rightfully) like the interior of Iowa's new north end zone, the exterior (at least IMO) really betrayed the traditional brick look of the stadium with a gaudy modern look ... praying we don't do that to the SEZ, given how iconic the exterior architecture of Memorial Stadium is!!

Iowa south end zone (renovated in like 2005 or something) that honored the traditional exterior look...

Iowa north end zone that I am NOT a fan of as far as the exterior goes...

 

[IlliniNash]

I think we can actually really get creative with the SEZ, and - as JW said - all options truly can be on the table. The main place where it is important to NOT have a curved setup is in front ... needless to say, any fix needs to have that first row of fans much, MUCH closer to the end zone than this, and a more "straight" first row is how we accomplish that.

With that said, we can arrange the section where the back is still curved, keeping the current shape. If you'll notice in the actual 2016 rendering, while the first row is straight and keeps fans closer to the end zone, the back still has a curved shape that somewhat extends farther back by the scoreboard and sort of angles back in by the towers:

I think there are definitely cool things we could do where we "square in" the lower rows to get them as close to the end zone as possible but then we put in an upper deck that keeps the "horseshoe shape" or whatever. As long as you can get the suites in the middle between the lower and upper decks (i.e., we would need the setup in West Main, not in East Main with seats underneath the balcony overhang), I think that could definitely be a winner!! My best shot at it ... try to imagine the columns actually ringing around the top and the upper deck as a clearly visible upper deck, lol...

View attachment 43715

I'd be game! I really, really, REALLY hope they go to great lengths to ensure the architecture of the SEZ compliments the rest of the stadium. I kind of hate how the back of the NEZ just has the backs of stairs visible and a rather bland style. And as much as people (rightfully) like the interior of Iowa's new north end zone, the exterior (at least IMO) really betrayed the traditional brick look of the stadium with a gaudy modern look ... praying we don't do that to the SEZ, given how iconic the exterior architecture of Memorial Stadium is!!

Iowa south end zone (renovated in like 2005 or something) that honored the traditional exterior look...

Iowa north end zone that I am NOT a fan of as far as the exterior goes...

The 4th picture down is worth forwarding to the AD. At the minimum they could use elements of that design that you made.

 

[Red77sng]

That fourth picture is sensational

 

[Fighter of the Nightman]

The 4th picture down is worth forwarding to the AD. At the minimum they could use elements of that design that you made.

That fourth picture is sensational

Thanks!! Now imagine if I actually had graphic design skills beyond copy/paste in Microsoft Paint! Would love for anyone with that skill to take a stab at it, and I hope more and more (actually well done) renderings start being posted on social media like that Zupke one or whatever!

 

[ORANGEANDBLUE2011]

Thanks!! Now imagine if I actually had graphic design skills beyond copy/paste in Microsoft Paint! Would love for anyone with that skill to take a stab at it, and I hope more and more (actually well done) renderings start being posted on social media like that Zupke one or whatever!

If they have a board for redesign, you HAVE to represent us on it!

 

[Captain 14]

Would any renovations mean the stadium is out of use for a year? Like when the Bears played at the stadium in 2001?

2002

 

[Dan]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1965902712127504522

 

[JKR]

Thanks!! Now imagine if I actually had graphic design skills beyond copy/paste in Microsoft Paint! Would love for anyone with that skill to take a stab at it, and I hope more and more (actually well done) renderings start being posted on social media like that Zupke one or whatever!

I'm sure that you've considered this, but any modification to the SEZ must account for Kirby Avenue. There is very little room between the current structure and the sidewalk along that Avenue. You might extend vertically or to the north, but you can't move to the south without closing the Avenue.

 

[Fighter of the Nightman]

I'm sure that you've considered this, but any modification to the SEZ must account for Kirby Avenue. There is very little room between the current structure and the sidewalk along that Avenue. You might extend vertically or to the north, but you can't move to the south without closing the Avenue.

View attachment 43721

Yeah, that is definitely something they should consider. However, it's worth noting that the 2016 rendering seems to suggest we would have a lot more room than we would all assume if we just make the stands steeper. These were released at the same time as part of the same design:

And this was the more scaled down idea floated in 2019:

We could of course also have an upper deck/balcony extend over the street, too. I think the ridiculously gradual slope of the current Horseshoe plus its comical distance from the field makes it look like we have less room back there than we think. While at Memorial Stadium, it's easy to think we only have the blue outlined space below to work with ... but we actually have the blue PLUS the orange once we properly renovate:

 

[DERV64]

Zero

think 2028. things don’t happen that fast
we need another $200 million

Just spending like 200k on 14 rows of bleachers down closer to the endzone would be a massive upgrade....thats all we really need....then we can make plans on a grand renovation later.

 

[oldman]

In all of these conversations there has been no reference to lowering the field. Is lowering the field still a consideration?

 

[the Castle on Daniel]

In all of these conversations there has been no reference to lowering the field. Is lowering the field still a consideration?

Lowering the field is likely cost prohibitive.

 

[IllinoisMan]

...but you can't move to the south without closing the Avenue.

For the non-locals here, will say for the record that closing Kirby permanently (not that JKR is advocating that) would be a non-starter. The closest through avenue connecting Champaign and Urbana to the south is Windsor, one mile away. To the north are Green and Springfield, which nobody in their right mind uses regularly unless they have to - going through campus can be a slog. University Ave is about a mile north of Kirby. In short, it's a critical east-west thoroughfare.

 

[MikeTisdale]

In all of these conversations there has been no reference to lowering the field. Is lowering the field still a consideration?

When OSU lowered their field in 1999, that total renovation project was $150MM and the vast majority of that cost was lowering the field 14 feet (and installing the super deep concrete slurry walls due to the high water table in that area). Say $100MM of the $150MM project was spent on lowering the field.

Illinois likely doesn't have the water table issues so wouldn't have all that extra expense (we're not right next to the Olentangy River and would probably be fine going down only 14 feet), but even just applying inflation to that means lowering the field for $100MM in 1999 dollars would be ~$320MM, and that doesn't include all the costs of building stands down closer to the field. Plus, construction costs have far outpaced general inflation over that time.

We're just going to have to live with the bad sightlines for the first few rows of the east & west stands.

 

[Shief]

When OSU lowered their field in 1999, that total renovation project was $150MM and the vast majority of that cost was lowering the field 14 feet (and installing the super deep concrete slurry walls due to the high water table in that area). Say $100MM of the $150MM project was spent on lowering the field.

Illinois likely doesn't have the water table issues so wouldn't have all that extra expense (we're not right next to the Olentangy River and would probably be fine going down only 14 feet), but even just applying inflation to that means lowering the field for $100MM in 1999 dollars would be ~$320MM, and that doesn't include all the costs of building stands down closer to the field. Plus, construction costs have far outpaced general inflation over that time.

We're just going to have to live with the bad sightlines for the first few rows of the east & west stands.

Unfortunately, Central Illinois does have a high water table and Champaign-Urbana is at the headwater of several regional rivers (Embarrass, Kaskaskia, etc.). Water levels can be as little as a few inches below the surface/grade in wet periods. This is why a bulldozer was buried during the initial stadium construction in the 1920s.

@Fighter of the Nightman, I will pitch stadium design ideas later, once I have some time to my gather thoughts.

 

[Pikeillinifan]

In all of these conversations there has been no reference to lowering the field. Is lowering the field still a consideration?

I'm sure it's something on the list, but as others have said, it's probably $200M alone just for that, not including anything else.

I would love it if they did something with the 'dead' seats that are tarped in the first couple rows as a stopgap to lowering the field, as that is likely years off.

I'm hoping we get, at a minimum, the horseshoe seats closer to the field, and/or some field-level club bringing the fans closer, and some other upgrades to enhance the horseshoe until that final big fix can be made (including lowering the field). But now that there is a rev share, it tightens up where $ can go, so I bet we are quite a ways off from that grand vision.

 

[21ChampaignSt]

I mean this in the most lighthearted way - but sometimes this thread reminds me of the episode of The Simpsons in which an automotive company, desperate to get more in touch with their target customer, entrusted a regular guy (Homer) to design their car of the future. And he designed this abomination that sunk the company.

Not poking fun at any one person or idea (there have been some good ones and some not good ones), just kind of hilarious to think about how absurd it could get if JW actually crowd sourced the design of the stadium