(08-24-2010 10:10 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(08-24-2010 06:50 PM)CajunT Wrote:  

(08-24-2010 06:41 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  The problem with the Cajun Dome is its never full so it looks like one ugly big dome filled with Empty Red seats

Haven't had much reason to be filled lately. But give Marlin a few years and even money says the Cajuns will average better then the Brady bunch up in Jonesboro.

Id love nothing more for ASU and ULL to be the Top Two in the belt. lets make it happen

Sydney Grider flashback.
I'm too young to remember Bo Lamar . . . :ncaabbs:

(08-24-2010 07:26 PM)cajun4life Wrote:  

(08-24-2010 05:29 PM)MG61 Wrote:  

(08-24-2010 05:16 PM)cajun4life Wrote:  

(08-24-2010 03:40 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(08-24-2010 03:36 PM)cajun4life Wrote:  Yes, that is the scoreboard and sound system it is the largest of its kind in America.

Well a large arena needs a large sound system and the Cajundome is most definitely large and if that's the current videoboard, I would definitely put our two video boards on either end of the court up against it.

Definitely the best video board and sound system in the Belt by far, but I think it is the 3rd best arena in the Belt right now. Diddle is number 1 and MT is 2nd.

IMO it is too big for just about every NCAA basketball program outside of the traditional top 25.

So you have been to ALL of the Belt arenas ?

I have been to everyone's but Troy and FAU I will make it to Troy's this year.

Dude the system is NBA quality, it is an upgrade to what the Hornets have.

Dude ? Ok, Slick.

I've asked our radio crew folks, and some have said that Denver has the best arena in the Belt. I've never been, so I don't know.

I think that the CajunDome is better than our basketball arena, until we get luxury suites and the bleachers out of there. Restrooms and concessions need a total overhaul.

In fact, I liked stAte's gym just as well as MT's, but they also have an indoor track in theirs (like we do).

(08-24-2010 05:16 PM)cajun4life Wrote:  

(08-24-2010 03:40 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(08-24-2010 03:36 PM)cajun4life Wrote:  

(08-24-2010 03:04 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(08-24-2010 02:52 PM)CajunT Wrote:  UL has added several improvements, including an NBA quality video score board with a surround sound system since your visit for the SBC Tournament. No SBC program as anything like it right now and only the Hornets have one as good or better in Louisiana.

Out of curiosity, is that the scoreboard and surround sound system in the attached picture?

Yes, that is the scoreboard and sound system it is the largest of its kind in America.

Well a large arena needs a large sound system and the Cajundome is most definitely large and if that's the current videoboard, I would definitely put our two video boards on either end of the court up against it.

Definitely the best video board and sound system in the Belt by far, but I think it is the 3rd best arena in the Belt right now. Diddle is number 1 and MT is 2nd.

IMO it is too big for just about every NCAA basketball program outside of the traditional top 25.

You're crazy for putting Murphy Center or the Cajundome ahead of the Mitchell Center. Personally, I think it's a coin toss or personal preferences that determines the difference between Diddle and the Mitchell Center.

And if you haven't been to the Jack Stephens Center in Little Rock, for a small venue, it's really nice, beautiful from the outside and good sight lines and creature comforts inside. The only thing that really bugged me was I felt like the color scheme inside was sort of drab, lots of brown or tan IIRC.

(08-24-2010 05:24 PM)theATLDawg Wrote:  25k for the MSU game. You see my point that I was agreeing with. we don't draw well when we play what is left of the WAC unless its homecoming.

That's a 17,983 average for the year.

Ahhhh, basketball arenas. A favorite subject of mine.

First, to my Tech bretheren, let me say i really like the TAC. Always have. Has the right amount of seating capacity (8000), seats are fairly close to the floor. Arena is almost 30 years old and shows its age a little. Accoustics are bad (that's a compliment) which means you can get some noise if you can get a crowd. LOVE the Hoop Troop, the most irreverent band I've witnessed in mid major basketball.

But to suggest that the TAC would be among the better arenas in the Sun Belt, well, you need to get out more.

I'm not going to rank them in order because I'd be splitting hairs to a degree:

Magness Arena (Denver) and Diddle Arena (WKU) are tops. Both have a reasonable seating capacity. One is only a decade old. The other had 28 million dollars put into an existing facility. Both are fan friendly with state of the art equipment.


The others:

SUN BELT WEST

ASU--The Convocation Center is a good facility. Not great. Seats too many for basketball (over 10,000) and way too many of those seats are in the end zones. But the seats are right on top of the court. Plenty of rooms in the Concourse area for booster functions, media, etc.

UALR--The Jack Stephens Center was built for only 26 million dollars a few years ago. Seating capacity of 5600 is good for now, but I see a problem if things start to take off at UALR. Because it was built for 26 mil, there are no bells and whistles there. But it's functional and a good place to watch a game.

UNT--The Super Pit is the arena I'd equate most to the Thomas Assembly Center in Ruston. Seats more (10,000) than the TAC, but it's a round facility with bad accoustics. A little older than the TAC, the Super Pit could be the most intimidating home court advantage in the league if attendance would start to show it. Even with 5000 in the stands, it can be the loudest crowd in the league.

ULM--Right near the bottom. Seats are raised off the floor and they're actually farther away from the court than the CAJUNDOME. It's old and frankly, it looks like nobody cares. They don't draw and it's in need of a major upgrade.

UL--Yep. It's too big. Cavernous is a good adjective. And those third level seats are pretty high up. But the jumbotron and ribbons around the end zones along with a new sound system will make it look big time if the crowds come back. But UL has only averaged 6000 for a season twice since it's been opened...and that barely makes it half full. There's a plan on the table for about a 30 million upgrade and if they do it right the place will be a palace. But it'll still be too big.

EAST
USA--The Mitchell Center is right behind Denver and Diddle. Too many seats (10,000) makes it third best. Funky looking scoreboard, but it serves the purpose. Again, those upper level seats are a big high, but I'm splitting hairs here. Because it's new, it has the periphery necessary to take care of fans and boosters.

MIDDLE TENNESSEE--The folks in the 'boro are higher on this place than I am. I would rate it no better than 6th or seventh in the league. The Murphy Center has chairbacks...then it has bleachers....since they don't draw that well, they keep the bleachers folded. The lower level is actually quite nice, with good sight lines. But slapping two video boards in the end zones isn't the upgrade this place needs. The court, however, is named for a radio broadcaster (Monte Hale, Sr.) and that gets extra points with me.

TROY--Until the new place is built, they have the old place. The Southland Conference would laugh at this one. To quote Bette Davis "What a dump...What a dump!!!"

FAU--Thanks to some hurricane money they were able to refurbish the FAU Arena ("The Burrow") a few years ago. But really, they put lipstick on a pig. An ugly pig.

FIU--Actually this place isn't as bad as Troy, FAU or Monroe. It's fairly new (1993, I think.) But only 1000 chairbacks, then bleachers. No amenities. They do, however, have the best concessions in the league, bar none. All the meats are freshly grilled and the smell of fresh popcorn makes you hungry.

So, okay I will rate them...and include the Thomas Assembly Center

1. Denver
2. WKU
3. USA
4. UALR
5. UL
6. ASU
7 MT
8. TECH
9. UNT
10. FIU
11. ULM
12. FAU
13. TROY

And when Troy is finished, they'll vault into the first divison (I'll have to see the finished product and not a drawing before I make a decision on that.)

(08-24-2010 11:37 AM)cajun4life Wrote:  

(08-24-2010 10:11 AM)CajunT Wrote:  

(08-24-2010 09:34 AM)Arrowhead Wrote:  ULM does not take all the money allowed from the general fund, but I sure wish we did. Hopefully the new President will. FYI, ULM is not dropping down. Ridiculous.

(08-24-2010 08:03 AM)CajunT Wrote:  

(08-23-2010 09:17 PM)HamiltonJames Wrote:  And ULL takes millions from the general fund. Who doesn't in Louisiana? UNO that's who....they chose to drop scholarship sports rather than to maintain the subsidy.
Everybody is going to have to get self sufficient in the next few years. You know the legislature is going to hawk that sooner rather than later....and it's not something that is going away because La's economy is not that bad and tax revenues are not going up and oil prices are stable. A good TV deal and other conference revenues will help, of course.

As does Tech and everyone else in the UL-System. UNO is part of the LSU-System, they chose to drop scholarships because their funding was cut and they had very little in private donations. As per the state cuts, more power to them if they allow student athletic fees for athletics general operations. UL will be at 20,000 students within four years, so student fees would bring much more revenue to athletics then the current state formula.

He is talking about the 3% allowed by the state towards athletics of your total state funds. All UL-System schools recieve that allocation. If he mean't the general operationg fund of the university, then he is incorrect.

Cajun T, I have been told by someone who I consider to be pretty credible when it comes to academics with regards to Louisiana's public institution. He has told me that Dr. Reneau as well as Dr. Cofer were not only taking the money that the state allows from the general fund which is 3%, but also in Tech's particular case taking money out of their academic endowment/foundation to supplement athletics.

I know that all ULS schools take the 3% allotted by the state out of the general fund. I also know when the state decides to stop allowing that and allows student fees UL will surpass all other ULS schools.

Cajun T you are also correct that our 4 year projected student population for undergraduates will put UL's student population between 20-21k.

Actually, information has been presented to ULM supporters that shows where ULM's administration was not transfering the entire amount that was available to athletics. This is one reason why we continued to be forced to do more with less, which our coaches were good at doing. However, I believe we short-changed athletics by about $1.5M every year. That money would have tremendously helped our cause.

(08-25-2010 09:18 AM)bluephi1914 Wrote:  

(08-24-2010 11:37 AM)cajun4life Wrote:  

(08-24-2010 10:11 AM)CajunT Wrote:  

(08-24-2010 09:34 AM)Arrowhead Wrote:  ULM does not take all the money allowed from the general fund, but I sure wish we did. Hopefully the new President will. FYI, ULM is not dropping down. Ridiculous.

(08-24-2010 08:03 AM)CajunT Wrote:  As does Tech and everyone else in the UL-System. UNO is part of the LSU-System, they chose to drop scholarships because their funding was cut and they had very little in private donations. As per the state cuts, more power to them if they allow student athletic fees for athletics general operations. UL will be at 20,000 students within four years, so student fees would bring much more revenue to athletics then the current state formula.

He is talking about the 3% allowed by the state towards athletics of your total state funds. All UL-System schools recieve that allocation. If he mean't the general operationg fund of the university, then he is incorrect.

Cajun T, I have been told by someone who I consider to be pretty credible when it comes to academics with regards to Louisiana's public institution. He has told me that Dr. Reneau as well as Dr. Cofer were not only taking the money that the state allows from the general fund which is 3%, but also in Tech's particular case taking money out of their academic endowment/foundation to supplement athletics.

I know that all ULS schools take the 3% allotted by the state out of the general fund. I also know when the state decides to stop allowing that and allows student fees UL will surpass all other ULS schools.

Cajun T you are also correct that our 4 year projected student population for undergraduates will put UL's student population between 20-21k.

Actually, information has been presented to ULM supporters that shows where ULM's administration was not transfering the entire amount that was available to athletics. This is one reason why we continued to be forced to do more with less, which our coaches were good at doing. However, I believe we short-changed athletics by about $1.5M every year. That money would have tremendously helped our cause.

General Fund and Foundation Money are two separate pots of money. The Foundation money is not subject to the same audit systems because it is privately generated and not public funds like the 3% allotted for athletics.