BroncoBob,


No doubt that the Boise State crowd was loud, I heard it on TV. But it also didn't sound as loud as a 100K seat stadium does either. When they said the stadium seats about 30K, I thought "wow, that's a loud crowd for 30K......I would have guessed there was 50K there."

That's a compliment, but it also means that I don't buy that your stadium is louder than most stadiums that seat 75K or more.


And from past experiences I have always found that loud stadiums do have an affect on opposing teams, but it isn't the crowd affecting the offense. It is the crowd pumping up the defense who then plays better and does better against the offense. Outside of hearing the signal count, if you are using vocal signals without a pattern to them, the offense doesn't have a problem with sound. The players are in a zone and thinking about their run/pass blocking assignments or receiver routes they are about to run instead of listening to the crowd. In some cases, you don't even realize that there is a crowd there.

RocketFan:

"It was because BG has no defense and Boise State is a great football team at home. "

I, uh, think this was pretty much the main point of my initial post. But thanks for making it entirely about your stadiums, which was a smack-based slight in an aside that I didn't anticipate would go anywhere (and qualified with the acknowledgement that ours is terrible).

Arkstfan:

Thanks for the comments, and good luck this year. I also think that Idaho and Utah State's struggles in the conference had a lot to do with lopsided travel demands, and expect to see both programs benefit from a move to a regional conference (as well as recent coaching changes). I look forward to continue following the conference. Looks wide open this year, with UNT having some exposed vulnerabilities in that Tulsa game...

BroncoBob:

I think Tom Cable can coach an offense, and there's no question he was in a tough spot at Idaho: bad facility and inappropriate conference affiliation. I also think he has some challenges as a head coach - I think when that 1-10 season broke, he pretty much gave up, and I think he hurt the school and the program with some of his public relations. I don't hold any real animosity toward him, though, and think UCLA might be able to make things interesting in the PAC-10 this year.

Ahem... You know you guys are argueing over stadiums don't you?

wolfin1 Wrote:Ahem... You know you guys are argueing over stadiums don't you?

What's the matter wolfin? Ya not into stadium smack?

Is it because some of this is a little too close to home?

"aluminum bleacher abuse...half the stadium capacity in the endzones...distanced from the field by a track...Nothing beats sitting on aluminum in below freezing temperatures."

Wait...that's why they make alcohol, right?

Vandal9570 Wrote:I think the MAC gets respect out of proportion to its actual performance . . . enough dregs to form a rival Sun Belt.

So since Idaho never won the SBC I guess you are saying your school was one of the SBC dreg's last year . . . LOL!!!

I realize you are but one Vandal fan; most Vandal fans have been very appreciative and classy concerning their relationship with the SBC. It gave your team a home until you could get into the WAC, after the other SBC teams that were approached declined due to the bad geography.

Your Welcome

:laugh:

Aloha Stadium is my personal favorite..comfy seats..good sight lines..and most of all you are watching a game in Paradise..Tough to beat.

Vandal9570 Wrote:I have seen Western Michigan, Central Michigan and Toledo's stadiums. I prefer any in the WAC (that I have visited) over them, and that includes the Kibbie Dome.

Western Michigan's indoor practice facility alone is better than the Kibble Dome. You are making yourself look silly.



On second thought, after actually looking at the picture, I guess you are right. WMU's facilities do appear 2nd-rate and are clearly not WAC-worthy...

Vandal9570 Wrote:RocketFan:

"It was because BG has no defense and Boise State is a great football team at home. "

I, uh, think this was pretty much the main point of my initial post. But thanks for making it entirely about your stadiums, which was a smack-based slight in an aside that I didn't anticipate would go anywhere (and qualified with the acknowledgement that ours is terrible).

I was only posting in regards to the posts about Boise State winning because BG couldn't handle the noise factor from the stadium.

Look, BG finished 3rd in the MAC West Division (not whole conference, but West Division) last year and I personally didn't think they would be as good as last year because their defense was worse and they lost WR Cole Magner which was a big possession receiver for them. Everyone else thought that Omar Jacobs was going to guide BG past all of this for some reason.

There is no doubt in my mind that Toledo and Northern Illinois are the two best teams in the MAC, with Miami, BG, and Akron filling the 3-5 spots.


And yes I know that Craig James kept saying that BG was the defending MAC Champions during the BG/BSU game Wednesday night, but James is an idiot. Toledo beat Miami in the MAC Championship last year. BG wasn't even close to the MAC title.

Vandal;
You have never been to Waldo or, most likely, any other MAC House.
You probably have never left Idaho in your life, in fact I bet you live in you mother's basement.


"Hi ho, I'm from Idaho"

.
.
:tank:
.

Attention all you haters from the MAC:
.
.
.
:space:
.
.
.
.
:hungry:
.
.
Idaho has recently purchased a new stadium! You will be able to poke fun at the Kibbie Dome NO LONGER!!
.
.
.
.
.
:fast:
.
.
.
:bond:
.
As soon as Jimmy can repaint the endzones to read "Vandals", they will be good to go.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
I have posted a life-sized image of the stadium to give you proper perspective (and because I didn't know how to resize it).
.
.
PS. I hope I entered enough "." s and emoticons to make my post sufficiently long and impressive!!!

:arse:

clpack Wrote:.
.
:tank:
.

Attention all you haters from the MAC:
.
.
.
:space:
.
.
.
.
:hungry:
.
.
Idaho has recently purchased a new stadium! You will be able to poke fun at the Kibbie Dome NO LONGER!!
.
.
.
.
.
:fast:
.
.
.
:bond:
.
As soon as Jimmy can repaint the endzones to read "Vandals", they will be good to go.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
I have posted a life-sized image of the stadium to give you proper perspective (and because I didn't know how to resize it).
.
.
PS. I hope I entered enough "." s and emoticons to make my post sufficiently long and impressive!!!

:arse:

:roflol: :roflol: :roflol:

To Badgerwolf:

"So since Idaho never won the SBC I guess you are saying your school was one of the SBC dreg's last year . . . "

Yeah. We never did well in the Sun Belt. Our D-IA record in the Big West was pretty good, including a conference championship and a victory in a bowl game. Our D-IA record in the Sun Belt was miserable. Travel? Coaching issues? Poor facilities? Doesn't matter. We were among the dregs of the Sun Belt for four years.

"I realize you are but one Vandal fan; most Vandal fans have been very appreciative and classy concerning their relationship with the SBC."

No issue with the SBC, and I think that's clear in my response to Astatefan. Call this the Vandal9570 honesty tour: I don't like most of the MAC stadiums (my opinion), and the Sun Belt is the lowest ranked D-IA conference in the nation (RPI, general opinion, my opinion, etc.). It is followed by the MAC. And then probably the WAC based on our OOC this season. Don't get your feelings hurt. I think the conference (Sun Belt) will go places, because it has schools situated in strong (and largely growing, unlike the MAC) markets, is in a good recruiting region, is in a region that cares a lot about football, has some nice new facilities (Troy, MTSU), and has a strong commissioner.

Take a joke, Sun Belt and MAC fans, or at least turn it around. A little self-deprecation would probably do your conference defenders some good. Admit your problems: they're out there. Trust me, I'm an Idaho fan - I'm not really looking down my nose at you. Just observing.

To BrewtownBronco:

"Western Michigan's indoor practice facility alone is better than the Kibble Dome. You are making yourself look silly."

I think the touchiness of MAC fans about their facilities has actually looked kind of silly...

My old lady went to WMU. I like Kalamazoo fine. Waldo Stadium has some issues, and your picture helps to demonstrate them. There's the old bleachers built into the hill which are okay, and then the rest is slapped-together aluminum with probably about 8,000 of your total seats in the endzones. It is not exactly ideal. I'm not saying you aren't good enough for the WAC (although we already have some Broncos. You might be interested in checking out their logo for copyright infringement...). Western Michigan has a pretty good football tradition that seems to have been derailed recently (like Idaho). But, like many MAC football programs, your stadium has a cobbled together feel. When the NCAA made a 30,000 seat stadium (briefly) mandatory, much of the MAC, with stadiums well below that capacity, responded by slapping up any arrangement of aluminum bleachers so they could remain D-1a. Now you have awkward stadiums that in places (Buffalo) resemble a Rube Goldberg apparatus. And to top it off, most of the MAC can't fill the ridiculous additions they made. It was stadium size for the sake of stadium size, at the price of atmosphere. At least Idaho's stadium is (unfortunately) scaled to current demand. When we have 16,000 fans, we have a home atmosphere. When Buffalo or Western Michigan has 16,000 fans, you have a half-empty stadium and a lot of wasted aluminum.

And I've been to Kalamazoo in the winter - are you sure you wouldn't rather have a dome for those November games? Or maybe start playing in that practice field...

And at last, rocketfootball:

"I was only posting in regards to the posts about Boise State winning because BG couldn't handle the noise factor from the stadium."

My apologies for blowing this post up as much as I have. See the response to BrewtownBronco for my take on MAC stadiums. The initial post (which had more to do with my belief that Fresno and Boise are just better teams than Toledo and BGSU - we'll see about Toledo soon enough) had an offhand comment that was a generalization about MAC stadiums in comparison to FSU and BSU, with a comment about its relevance to the game (BSU/BGSU) that was not intended to be taken literally. It was smack. I don't like the MAC stadiums, and think that on average (mean, not range) the WAC offers better facilities. But no, MAC defenders, I don't think it's that relevant to the outcome of many road games (despite the relevance of home field advantage), and am aware that the MAC has performed respectably in the past in hostile venues, which are generally much nicer than your own. When it was attacked, I defended it, and maybe a little too thoroughly. This will be my last post, so this thing can die out before I somehow get ConferenceUSA and the Mountain West involved, too.

But if any other mid-major fans out there want to jump on the post and defend your facilities or conference insecurities, this is your chance! It's the thin-skinned post for recent under-performers! Playing in an ice cube stadium in the arctic? An efficient use of local resources! 98% of your seating in one endzone? No one misses a score on that end of the field! Playing in a plywood dome roughly the shape of a tipped-over beer can? Feel free to post at will:

(That's more in the spirit, clpack...)

I'm privileged to be your last response ("And at last rocketfootball").


I don't really care about the facilities argument. I personally think that Toledo's need some work, especially on the basketball side of things. Of course that is why we will begin construction soon on renovating our basketball arena and building a multi-sport indoor practice facility that will also have a 60 yard football field in it for the football team.

Anyway, I really hope we will get to see how good Toledo is. Unfortunately right now are QB appears to be questionable for the game Tuesday night against Fresno State. No one knows his status as of right now. If he doesn't play we will take a big hit, because his backup is a freshman. Yes, the backup has played well so far this year as he is 14 of 16 for 97 yards and no INT's, but he lacks the experience needed to play on the road against a worthy opponent.

rocketfootball Wrote:I was only posting in regards to the posts about Boise State winning because BG couldn't handle the noise factor from the stadium.

No one said that they lost the game only because of noise. If noise is no factor, then why do most players on a home field motion the crowd to crank it up?

Can't... stop... posting...

"I don't really care about the facilities argument. I personally think that Toledo's need some work, especially on the basketball side of things. Of course that is why we will begin construction soon on renovating our basketball arena and building a multi-sport indoor practice facility that will also have a 60 yard football field in it for the football team."

That's good to hear. Idaho's basketball facilities could also use some upgrades. Because they're also the Kibbie Dome. :bang:

The domed, multi-use stadium is a terrible legacy from the past for any school stuck with one. It puts a really difficult cap on any athletic program growth in the future, because you have little to build from - a football stadium (probably) has to start from scratch, a true basketball arena (probably) has to start from scratch, etc. Idaho would be in really good shape today if, in the late 60's, we kept our 20,000 seat outdoor stadium (which could have been easily expanded), and built a basketball arena instead of the dome. Would that have been so hard? Instead, we've got a brown and gold 1970's architectural monster on the west end of our campus...

Call off the dogs, MAC fans: we've all got room to improve. My real issue with MAC stadiums is probably the old NCAA 30,000 seat rule, which caused a lot of mid-major schools to do some ridiculous things in terms of stadium design and use, whether renting a stadium from a nearby rival, or rigging up outrageous bleacher arrangements that only provide seats, not quality seats or atmosphere.

"Anyway, I really hope we will get to see how good Toledo is."

Should be an interesting game. I think Fresno State is really solid this year, despite the narrow loss to Oregon. I do like the Boise/BGSU, Fresno/Toledo match-ups, though. It's good to see some of the stronger mid-majors face each other head-to-head.

Shrakkrocket Wrote:

Vandal9570 Wrote:I have seen Western Michigan, Central Michigan and Toledo's stadiums. I prefer any in the WAC (that I have visited) over them, and that includes the Kibbie Dome.

are you really saying that this




is better than this?






please share whatever it is you're on.

Or this?

OR THIS:

gaard Wrote:

rocketfootball Wrote:I was only posting in regards to the posts about Boise State winning because BG couldn't handle the noise factor from the stadium.

No one said that they lost the game only because of noise. If noise is no factor, then why do most players on a home field motion the crowd to crank it up?

Because it pumps up the defense. I simply stated that the crowd noise itself wasn't affecting the BG offense. However, I also said that the crowd would pump up the defense and they would play better because of it, and made some plays on the BG offense to stop them.

Vandal9570 Wrote:And as a result, the WAC is a better conference than the WAC.

This statement is, by definition, false - but who is going to argue it? (yes, I know it's a typo)

Anyway - despite your attempts to twist my statement that "NotreDame and Michigan would prefer aluminum benches to what they have" into "they would prefer to play in MAC stadiums" - the statement still stands: aluminum benches are far superior for a stadium than what they currently have - which is wood benches. Michigan and NotreDame are considered two of the premiere stadiums in the country - and they both have wooden bench seating. Most outdoor college football stadiums have bench seating - in fact, most WAC football stadiums have bench seating. Aluminum doesn't rust, splinter or break - it's the better seating choice for an outdoor football stadium in the midwest. Of course, by calling them "bleachers" instead of benches, you're implying that the stadium structure isn't solid - but all the stadiums we're talking about are solid - you can't drop something under your seat to the ground. It's nothing like a high school stadium. Some of the ~30,000 seat I-A stadiums have erected actual "bleachers" for additional seating in endzones to meet the 30,000 seat requirement from years past - but it does not make up a large portion of seats in most of those stadiums (MAC as well as WAC). Most have been replaced since with renovations or come down entirely. I believe BGSU's endzone bleachers came down after last season, but I haven't been there yet this year to verify that (I'll let you know).

No college with an outdoor football stadium is going to invest in plastic folding seats (which is what I assume you must be preferring), because it eliminates too many potential seats. Some provide some seats like that near the 50 yard line as a major donor season ticket perk - but few have the majority of seats of that style. That's more of a basketball arena thing - because there aren't nearly as many seats to buy.

The whole host of pictures presented here by several posters show the reality of a few of the MAC stadiums - Waldo, Glass Bowl, Doyt, Peden etc - and they aren't the way you characterize them. They're small (though not by WAC standards - as I've already shown), but they have most of their seating between the goal lines. And obviously - the "most" for WMU's Waldo is not the 55-60% like you're claiming - but closer to 80% on the sidelines. The picture provided above shows that pretty clearly. My comment that Waldo is not as picturesque as the Glass Bowl or Kelly/Shorts is due to the fact that the stadium is actually four seperate sections of seats - not a single bowl - which I believe looks a lot better, holds the sound better, etc. But whether I like the style or not - it's a nice stadium.

And if you want to to split hairs - many people prefer endzone seating. And of course, there is no greater 12th man effect for a school than for their opponent to have to drive into the student section endzone late in the game. That's why home teams will always choose the student section end of the field in OT. Personally, I don't care for endzone seats - but many do.

As for your crticism of the Glass Bowl's age? This couldn't be more irrelevant. Should we tear down Wrigley Field because it was built before WWII? How about Fenway? Toledo's stadium may have been originally built pre-WWII - but it isn't a dump. Your "facility" is decades newer and I still contend it doesn't hold a shadow to the Glass Bowl.

How about CMU's (one of the MAC stadiums you claim to have been in): Built in 1972, 80-90% of the seating between the goal lines. This is a great facility. What is there to complain about there? That it isn't 50,000 seats? They don't have the local population to fill a stadium that big - an issue you should be able to comprehend. But at 30,199, it more than holds it's own compared to any MAC or WAC stadiums for size.

Anyway (again) - you've failed to show how the "real stadiums" at BoiseSt and FresnoSt are going to rattle MAC teams because they're so unused to that "real stadium size". There is virtually no difference between WAC stadiums and MAC stadiums in terms of size. The WAC has two larger than the MAC or the rest of the WAC - and the WAC also has the smallest one by far. BoiseSt's is right around the average for both conferences and smaller than their opponent's home field.

The comment about the MAC frequently using NFL veneues and Temple's venue is on target (regardless of whether you're impressed by it) since the topic is the "size of stadiums that the MAC is used to playing in vs the size of WAC stadiums". You introduced the topic - and have been backtracking from it at every turn. Of course, If I'd have made such an indefensible statement - I'd keep trying to change the topic too.

A couple other MAC stadiums that are perfectly acceptable I-A stadiums - even if you don't think so.

<a href='http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/north_america/united_states/ohio/oxford_fred_yager.shtml' target='_blank'>Miami(OH)'s Yager</a>

<a href='http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/north_america/united_states/ohio/bowling_green_perry.shtml' target='_blank'>a dated BGSU's Doyt stadium picture (the endzones are both different now)</a>

<a href='http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/north_america/united_states/ohio/kent_dix.shtml' target='_blank'>Kent State's Dix Stadium</a>

<a href='http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/north_america/united_states/illinois/de_kalb_huskie.shtml' target='_blank'>NIU's Huskie Stadium</a>

<a href='http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/north_america/united_states/michigan/mount_pleasant_kelly_shorts.shtml' target='_blank'>CMU's Kelly/Shorts</a>

summary observatons:

- boise has a very wide gap between the stands and the field - so vandal#### probably doesn't like it (just like he doesn't like buffalo or emu).
- nevada has a lot of its seating on aluminum bleachers in the end zone, so vandal#### pobably doesn't like it (just like buffalo or emu).
- fresno state built their stadium up beyond 30,000 by making a bowl - which means a whole lot of bad end zone seats, so vandal#### probably doesn't like it.
- uh oh - utah state has end zone seats in their 30,000 seat horseshoe (hmm - looks like cmu's stadium as far as the number of seats in each area - and with all those bleacher seats), so vandal#### probably doesn't like it
- la-tech seems to be all bleacher seating - so vandal#### probably doesn't like it either (looks like miami-ohio's yeager stadium to me)
- sjsu has a stadium built in 1933 (like toledo does) so it must be a dump by vandal####'s standards (actually, i've heard this one actually is a dump)
- and of course, hawaii's "considerably larger than any other wac or mac stadium" has two levels of endzone seats in each endzone - so vandal#### probably doesn't like it (plus - it's really friggin' ugly).

and of course, nmsu and idaho have the worst stadiums in the wac (or mac) - and there is no argument for that.

so it looks like we should tear down each and every mac and wac stadium - when we look at it and apply vandal####'s criteria. or perhaps, vandal####'s criteria is based on ...well, a vandal fan.

and for the record - the only thing wrong with emu's stadium is that it's generally empty

....that - and that the team is officially called the "eagles" - when it should still be called the "hurons". like we really needed another frickin' team called the "eagles". what - were "wildcats" and "bulldogs" already taken too many times?. at least they could have been unique and called themselves the e.m.u. emus. geesh.