Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Jaka, post: 534149, member: 126"] I was comparing it to ND and Mich (b4 the club seats). They are really basic setups (concrete with bleacher seats). I know the Dome isn't "high end" compared to other stadiums. I used the word glitzy in the spur of the moment. It wasn't meant to be a serious analytical evaluation of the Dome's aesthetics. I agree with that the Dome is fine too. People can't predict the future, so there is no sense in getting upset (not saying you) at people who are thinking about future stadium possibilities. 10 years of saving $10 milion dollars gives you $100 mil (using ACC rev), that's not a bad start for a new stadium if that is in the adminstrations itinerary. Who's to say there aren't private investors, state and local $, and big-time alums to throw in some cash on top of that? It's not as outlandish as some people think. [/QUOTE]