Life after the Carrier Dome?

[IthacaMatt]

But we already have a place that stands out, and we already have a court named after Boeheim, and we already have a place that can accommodate 30K people. Why spend all this money on something that isn't necessary?

There could be a better facility, one that had parking lots and better access for fans to get to. Tailgating could improve by leaps and bounds. If they don't put it at Drumlins, I think the ideal area is the Inner Harbor, which is still undeveloped.

 

[DoubleDee]

I'm all for modernizing the Dome and sprucing it up cosmetically, as needed. But I hope we play in it for another 30 years. It is the single most famous thing associated with the city of Syracuse. Even though it has all the bells and whistles and I'm sure is a beautiful arena, I have no interest whatsoever of playing in some soulless equivalent of the KFC Yum Center.

Amen sister! This conversation so beyond a dead horse. Nothing is good enough do the fans around here. Boeheim starts a season 20-0, looses a game, and some want him out the door.

30 years into a new 300m arena, and they'd want that gone too.

Improve and update the gem we have!

 

[Eric15]

There could be a better facility, one that had parking lots and better access for fans to get to. Tailgating could improve by leaps and bounds. If they don't put it at Drumlins, I think the ideal area is the Inner Harbor, which is still undeveloped.

I personally find the Dome just fine in terms of parking, getting in and out, and tailgating. I feel like putting a stadium in the middle of a giant parking lot (like UConn's) is depressing. I love how the Dome is situated right in the middle of campus - it adds so much nostalgia.

 

[sutomcat]

My understanding is that they already have plans for a new replacement multi-use retractable roof Dome at Skytop.

Sent from my SCH-I200 using Tapatalk 2

This is correct. When the Dome is replaced, it will be with another multi-purpose dome, which will host the football and basketball teams, and it will almost certainly have a retractable roof.

Despite the parking/tailgating/general access problems at the current location, I agree it is great to have the Dome right on the main campus. When the day comes when it isn't there anymore, I will miss that part of the Dome experience greatly.

 

[lincolncuse]

Exactly. If it's taken us this long to fund an IPF for football, how long would it take to fund a $100+million arena. I'd rather see the exterior of the dome given an orange and blue treatment and the interior upgraded.

You are probably talking $400-500 million for a retractable roof dome

 

[OrangeXtreme]

This is correct. When the Dome is replaced, it will be with another multi-purpose dome, which will host the football and basketball teams, and it will almost certainly have a retractable roof.

Why can't it have a fixed roof, like the new Vikings stadium:

http://www.vikings.com/news/article...m-Design/a22f251d-0e66-4c42-aab3-a32269114660

I can't see spending an extra $100 mil for a roof that "may" be opened for a handful of football games, and closed the rest of the time.

 

[jekelish]

As much as a state of the art, basketball only facility doesn't sound totally bad to me, as others have mentioned the Dome is a huge recruiting tool. Plus, every single season we invariably get one or two games where we get headlines of, "Syracuse packs 35k into Carrier Dome" or "New On Campus Record as Syracuse Crushes UConn" and so forth. I'm not willing to lose that, personally. Additionally, the Dome allows us to host NCAA Regionals, and will continue to do so as they seem to be moving more toward football stadiums as venues, which already gives us a leg up.

 

[sufandu]

You are probably talking $400-500 million for a retractable roof dome

Thank you for strengthening my point.

 

[sutomcat]

Why can't it have a fixed roof, like the new Vikings stadium:

http://www.vikings.com/news/article...m-Design/a22f251d-0e66-4c42-aab3-a32269114660

I can't see spending an extra $100 mil for a roof that "may" be opened for a handful of football games, and closed the rest of the time.

That design calls for doors that open to the skyline, so it also has the ability to be opened in good weather. I agree that it is not imperative to have walls that open or a roof that retracts, or seating for that matter than can be configured for small events (like basketball) and big events (like football); see the UNLV stadium design referenced elsewhere in this thread.

It just seems like all the domes built in the last 20 years or so have these kinds of features. Where did you get the $100 million figure from? I would think if the cost to retract was that high, some recent projects would opt for a fixed roof. My guess is that a retractable roof was not possible given the glass roof the Vikings are going with.

But back to your point. I would personally value a flexible seating design over a design that featured a retractable roof. It would be great to have a design where the seating could be configured for different types of events, so the facility could host FIFA soccer games (wider playing field), softball games (wider and deeper), football, basketball, hockey in the most intimate settings possible.

 

[Millhouse]

I personally find the Dome just fine in terms of parking, getting in and out, and tailgating. I feel like putting a stadium in the middle of a giant parking lot (like UConn's) is depressing. I love how the Dome is situated right in the middle of campus - it adds so much nostalgia.

and people who want to park in a giant parking lot can. they just have to take a quick shuttle.

 

[edowd26]

That design calls for doors that open to the skyline, so it also has the ability to be opened in good weather. I agree that it is not imperative to have walls that open or a roof that retracts, or seating for that matter than can be configured for small events (like basketball) and big events (like football); see the UNLV stadium design referenced elsewhere in this thread.

It just seems like all the domes built in the last 20 years or so have these kinds of features. Where did you get the $100 million figure from? I would think if the cost to retract was that high, some recent projects would opt for a fixed roof. My guess is that a retractable roof was not possible given the glass roof the Vikings are going with.

But back to your point. I would personally value a flexible seating design over a design that featured a retractable roof. It would be great to have a design where the seating could be configured for different types of events, so the facility could host FIFA soccer games (wider playing field), softball games (wider and deeper), football, basketball, hockey in the most intimate settings possible.

A glass roof? Sounds potentially lethal.

 

[realorange]

That design calls for doors that open to the skyline, so it also has the ability to be opened in good weather. I agree that it is not imperative to have walls that open or a roof that retracts, or seating for that matter than can be configured for small events (like basketball) and big events (like football); see the UNLV stadium design referenced elsewhere in this thread.

It just seems like all the domes built in the last 20 years or so have these kinds of features. Where did you get the $100 million figure from? I would think if the cost to retract was that high, some recent projects would opt for a fixed roof. My guess is that a retractable roof was not possible given the glass roof the Vikings are going with.

But back to your point. I would personally value a flexible seating design over a design that featured a retractable roof. It would be great to have a design where the seating could be configured for different types of events, so the facility could host FIFA soccer games (wider playing field), softball games (wider and deeper), football, basketball, hockey in the most intimate settings possible.

What is the need for an open roof of any kind? If you want to see the sky, go outdoors. If you want to see the game (of any kind) you are looking at the field/court. It seems it's nothing more than some perceived need of aesthetics.

 

[rrlbees]

Plans? Perhaps. Funds? Dream on.

It will happen. We are going to South Campus. I've said it for years and will keep saying it. Gross wants a new facility and the University wants the property the Dome is on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Where did you get the $100 million figure from? I would think if the cost to retract was that high, some recent projects would opt for a fixed roof. My guess is that a retractable roof was not possible given the glass roof the Vikings are going with.

Just a guess on the $100 mil. I have to think a retractable roof would be more expensive with all the machinery involved.

They're not building air-supported domes anymore. Too 1970's. Everything is either fixed roof, retractable roof, or open air.

I'd prefer a fixed roof, and use the extra money for nicer seats with cupholders.

 

[DoubleDee]

so the facility could host FIFA soccer games (wider playing field), softball games (wider and deeper), football, basketball, hockey in the most intimate settings possible.

What's soccer?

 

[MikeSU02]

Just for some context about what stadiums are looking like, check out the two proposals for the new Georgia Dome:

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-s...ideas-don-t-just-push-envelope-123901552.html

 

[longtimefan]

I would personally value a flexible seating design over a design that featured a retractable roof. It would be great to have a design where the seating could be configured for different types of events, so the facility could host FIFA soccer games (wider playing field), softball games (wider and deeper), football, basketball, hockey in the most intimate settings possible.

I would be careful re: flexible seating designs. A design that could be used for many different sports might be a design that is not good for some, or any, of them. Think back to the "multi-use" stadiums introduced in the '70's. Shea, Three Rivers, etc., etc. were all pretty lousy, and were replaced with sport-specific buildings. I don't doubt that those same sorts of mistakes would not be made again. But I would try to keep the functionality limited to those sports that are most important to the SU community. So: an excellent football configuration (which would cover lacrosse, too); an improved basketball set-up (which could cover the hockey angle, especially if the Crunch wanted to become a partner); don't worry about FIFA, as Central New York is not a soccer destination. If they can figure how to shoe-horn a softball field in there, good for them.

In any case, I still wonder about the cost. Such a building would likely cost in the multiple hundreds of millions.

 

[Brian Orange]

This is the first I am hearing about the new stadium (whenever it comes) having a retractable roof. I think that's a great idea. We were the first school with a dome on campus, now we can be the first with a retractable roof on campus. By the time this thing is built I am guessing the technology will be so good the price won't be as steep. I just read this week the Philadelphia Eagles were considering putting on a temporary roof of their stadium in a bid to host the Super Bowl. Stuff like that can be done, and probably not for a huge price.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

This is the first I am hearing about the new stadium (whenever it comes) having a retractable roof. I think that's a great idea. We were the first school with a dome on campus, now we can be the first with a retractable roof on campus. By the time this thing is built I am guessing the technology will be so good the price won't be as steep. I just read this week the Philadelphia Eagles were considering putting on a temporary roof of their stadium in a bid to host the Super Bowl. Stuff like that can be done, and probably not for a huge price.

http://articles.philly.com/2013-06-18/sports/40050561_1_jeffrey-lurie-super-bowl-l-sun-life-stadium

"Can you do a temporary roof for a Super Bowl? Can you retrofit a retractable roof?" Lurie asked. "I would guess the answer is really no at this point."

 

[CU44SE]

It will happen. We are going to South Campus. I've said it for years and will keep saying it. Gross wants a new facility and the University wants the property the Dome is on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Would the university help fund the project then or would still have to come strictly from athletics and tax breaks?

 

[Rocco]

I look forward to the day that Syracuse has a good football tailgating atmosphere. A big ass parking lot next to an football field. That's all I want.

 

[DoubleDee]

Whether or not 81 gets taken down, how bout we just renovate the dome, and make a parking lot out of brick city?

 

[sufandu]

This is the first I am hearing about the new stadium (whenever it comes) having a retractable roof. I think that's a great idea. We were the first school with a dome on campus, now we can be the first with a retractable roof on campus. By the time this thing is built I am guessing the technology will be so good the price won't be as steep. I just read this week the Philadelphia Eagles were considering putting on a temporary roof of their stadium in a bid to host the Super Bowl. Stuff like that can be done, and probably not for a huge price.

Maybe the cost of retractable roof technology will decrease, but the overall cost of football stadiums only increases. The dome was $28 million when it was built. The new cowboy stadium was $1.3 billion in 2009, lucas oil stadium was $720 million 2008, and university of phoenix stadium (probably the best comparison to what SU would want in regard to capacity and use) was $455 million in 2006. A new stadium with a retractable roof would be at least $500 million.

 

[Bayside44]

Maybe the cost of retractable roof technology will decrease, but the overall cost of football stadiums only increases. The dome was $28 million when it was built. The new cowboy stadium was $1.3 billion in 2009, lucas oil stadium was $720 million 2008, and university of phoenix stadium (probably the best comparison to what SU would want in regard to capacity and use) was $455 million in 2006. A new stadium with a retractable roof would be at least $500 million.

It's a pipe dream. No one in their right mind would pay for that and the state is busted.

 

[sufandu]

It's a pipe dream. No one in their right mind would pay for that and the state is busted.

Completely agree. Notre Dame stadium was built in 1930, Michigan Stadium in 1927, and Neyland Stadium in 1921. These are all considered meccas for college football and have been renovated numerous times over the years. SU doesn't need a new stadium. They can keep the Dome relevant through renovations for many more years.