What if...

[bob87]

Bob...what are you talking about. IT IS BASIC CONSTRUCTION ISSUES...and NOTHING TO DO WITH FIRE CODES. We have room for more than 5000 (in fact, I would venture to say that on certain dates we have had closer to 5200 in the building. But that is with SRO and Courtside. The seats themselves seat 4538. We added about 100-200 more with courtside. Forgeting all that for a moment, the construction issue is a SIZE ISSUE.

 

The seats w/o chairbacks are probably 4-6 inches SMALLER than those with chairbacks when you consider the added hardware. When BU retrofitted their arena with all chairbacks I believe they went from capacity of 3000...to 2000.

 

This...is just commonsense. It is also an issue with the team I loathe...the Red Sox. At one point they asked major league baseball for a stipend if they retrofitted the seats to make them larger...because they were going to lose capacity and thus they looked at other sites in the city to build fresh...while MLB wanted them to keep Fenway.

 

If we take out both sides of the RACC and put in all chairbacks, SIZE ISSUES (because of hardware) will have you LOSE CAPACITY. It's pretty simple. Now you could probably cheat...but then arm rests would narrow the chairs and you would get Fenway complaints (seats are too narrow for larger people).

 

The only way to truly add chairbacks...and keep capacity would be a flat out arena expansion...or a manufacturer who can defy the laws of math, physics, and basic tenets of construction.

 

Look I may be wrong, but my understanding is we have room for 5000 now. Also I think we can not officially sell 5,000 seats and list the official capacity at around 4600 due to the fire code, number of exits or whatever. Therefore when you take out a bleacher that seats say 16 and replace it with chairbacks that seat say 14 it does not matter until the capacity goes under 4600 unless you are cheating now by selling 5000 instead of 4600.

I can measure the chairbacks at the next game and the bleachers and do the math. But there is no way the bleachers have 30 seats in the same space as 20 chairbacks which is what you are imply with the 3000 to 2000 number.

[Dane96]

Ok...go measure Bob. I guess every other arena/stadium that does a retrofit...is different than ours. Trust me on this.

 

Bob, we have room for 5000 with SRO and squeezing.. We literally have 4538 SEATS. Michigan SEATS whatever there number is...but squeezes another X amount of fans into the Big House by utilizing the AISLES...and squeezing fannies onto the bleachers. It is a common practice. So, if you can follow, we can FIT 5000 into the arena...but we do not have 5000 official seats. When you pull seats out and add wider seats...you lose seats. Based on steepness, the ends probably couldnt be done...but you better believe you are going to lose at least 50-100 seats PER SECTION (about two seats per aisle). That comes to about 600-1000 seats.

 

We all agree, the magical number for an arena is 4000...you dont want to get lower.

 

When Cabot got retrofitted at NU...same thing happened.

 

It happens all the time.

 

Sure we could still fit 4600...but not in seats...they would be standing.

[bob87]

Ok...go measure Bob. I guess every other arena/stadium that does a retrofit...is different than ours. Trust me on this.

 

Bob, we have room for 5000 with SRO and squeezing.. We literally have 4538 SEATS. Michigan SEATS whatever there number is...but squeezes another X amount of fans into the Big House by utilizing the AISLES...and squeezing fannies onto the bleachers. It is a common practice. So, if you can follow, we can FIT 5000 into the arena...but we do not have 5000 official seats. When you pull seats out and add wider seats...you lose seats. Based on steepness, the ends probably couldnt be done...but you better believe you are going to lose at least 50-100 seats PER SECTION (about two seats per aisle). That comes to about 600-1000 seats.

 

We all agree, the magical number for an arena is 4000...you dont want to get lower.

 

When Cabot got retrofitted at NU...same thing happened.

 

It happens all the time.

 

Sure we could still fit 4600...but not in seats...they would be standing.

 

Not sure why you are being a Siena fan here and missing the point. The discussion is not whether seats take up more room than benches. Duh, even most Siena fans know that. The discussion is what the starting point is. Again is it 5000 or 4538. No where I saw is 4538 the number of seats. Your math does not work. I already said we could put chair backs in the lower half of Sections 150,250 and 550. Arenas all the time have chair backs in certain sections and chairbacks make more money for the school in every arena than benchs per seat. Then using your math of 50-100 per section is 50-100 times 3 times 1/2. 75-100, not a big deal especially if we currently have the bleachers seats more spread than necessary as I was told was the case and a hell of a lot different than losing 33 percent of seats that you claim BU did. I find that number to be absurd.

[Dane96]

Ok...go measure Bob. I guess every other arena/stadium that does a retrofit...is different than ours. Trust me on this.

 

Bob, we have room for 5000 with SRO and squeezing.. We literally have 4538 SEATS. Michigan SEATS whatever there number is...but squeezes another X amount of fans into the Big House by utilizing the AISLES...and squeezing fannies onto the bleachers. It is a common practice. So, if you can follow, we can FIT 5000 into the arena...but we do not have 5000 official seats. When you pull seats out and add wider seats...you lose seats. Based on steepness, the ends probably couldnt be done...but you better believe you are going to lose at least 50-100 seats PER SECTION (about two seats per aisle). That comes to about 600-1000 seats.

 

We all agree, the magical number for an arena is 4000...you dont want to get lower.

 

When Cabot got retrofitted at NU...ame thing happened.

 

It happens all the time.

 

Sure we could still fit 4600...but not in seats...they would be standing.

 

Not sure why you are being a Siena fan here and missing the point. The discussion is not whether seats take up more room than benches. Duh, even most Siena fans know that. The discussion is what the starting point is. Again is it 5000 or 4538. No where I saw is 4538 the number of seats. Your math does not work. I already said we could put chair backs in the lower half of Sections 150,250 and 550. Arenas all the time have chair backs in certain sections and chairbacks make more money for the school in every arena than benchs per seat. Then using your math of 50-100 per section is 50-100 times 3 times 1/2. 75-100, not a big deal especially if we currently have the bleachers seats more spread than necessary as I was told was the case and a hell of a lot different than losing 33 percent of seats that you claim BU did. I find that number to be absurd.

 

 

Bob...you win.

 

I think I may hire you for my next stadium expansion. It is apparent you have worked in construction before. It is also clearly apparent that logic...is your strong suit.

 

Where were you when BU was expanding...and for about another 100 stadium retrofit projets.

 

Heck, you can get a good job with the Sox...I have a contact there. BTW...he told me retro fit specs for stadium chair backs (smallest seat) is 22-23' arm rest to arm rest, 18 inches for the back.

 

Now...if you go and measure each seat w/o a chairback in the CUE...I think you will be suprised.

[alum73]

I heard from a reliable source that there may be chairbacks on one side, (opposite your's Bob). No exact time frame, but that's what I heard. I guess that would keep the losses of capacity to acceptable levels.

[Dane96]

I heard from a reliable source that there may be chairbacks on one side, (opposite your's Bob). No exact time frame, but that's what I heard. I guess that would keep the losses of capacity to acceptable levels.

 

Which would make much sense. Losing 400-500 seats is no big deal.

[bob87]

I heard from a reliable source that there may be chairbacks on one side, (opposite your's Bob). No exact time frame, but that's what I heard. I guess that would keep the losses of capacity to acceptable levels.

 

Great! They should be more chairbacks within reason. I would think as far as the amount of seat difference, it would make no difference as to whether they were on one side completely compared to both sides halfway up. If it is easier to put them on one side , go with that plan especially since they won't lose nearly as many seats as Dane96 says and that keeps visiting fans in the bleachers.

[UA_MA_2000]

A couple seating questions:

 

(1) Could we ever utilize the corners for additional seating? I realize we have an indoor track in the "Q," but I'm sure some engineers could come up with something creative; if nothing else, extend the student bleachers or the side bleachers a little bit. Accepting the loss of space associated with putting in chair backs, could we regain that space by extending the chairback section on each end towards the walls. Grant it, some of the far end seats might not be the greatest, but those seats would be NO different than the corner seats at other venues! In sum, there is a lot of interior space, especially in the corners that has not yet been utilized.

 

Of course, we could always knock out the walls and roof and build an upper deck. (*joke, though how cool would that be?*)

 

(2) I am not aware of the specific strictures of any applicable zoning laws concerning the SEFCU Arena, but there is always, of course, the option of amending those regulations, such as they are. I would image that they are city or county zoning regulations, but I would have to look into it to know more.

 

(3) Sorry if these questions were already answered through the foregoing responses!

[Dane Pound]

No need to apologize for the questions. It's always great to have new people on the board who are interested. In the event that we do cover things we've talked about before some of the more recent "board members" can often offer a fresh perspective.

 

One of the things I remember being discussed in the CU is having a new and improved concessions area linked with the football stadium. That in itself would be nice and maybe open the possibility for some more/better seating down the line. This is all down the line but hey, I'm in it for the long haul anyway!

 

After being at Patrick Gym the fire code thing amazes me at the CU. Seemed like we were crammed into the Patrick Gym with very little exits and it was legal. By comparision the CU seems to have a ton of exits and we still can't fill it to it's seating capacity.

[alum73]

Yes that was interesting. There are way more exits at sefcu arena. I'd love to see the detailed plans for that common SEFCU/Stadium area.

[UA_MA_2000]

1. If the America East tournament was ever held in Albany, I imagine that the Times Union Center would be a likely situs for the Tournament, though I'd prefer the Tournament to be held at the "CU" of course. Of course, the T.U. Ctr. would be set up, I would imagine, like it is for home Siena games (w/ the black curtain in the upper tier). I'd be curious to see what kind of attendance we'd get for UAlbany games held at the T.U. Center if the Tournament was ever held there. I would think at least 6,000, no? Thoughts?

 

2. As far as Albany being a host city to the Tournament, I would posit that it is a sensible location for the tournament (at least as sensible as Binghamton) in terms of a city that is central to a lot of teams in the conference. By car, and to the Times Union Center, my off-the-top-of-my-head estimates are: Hartford (2.5 hrs?); UMBC (6 hours); Maine (6 hrs.?); B.U. (2.5-3.0 hrs); Binghamton (2-2.5 hrs.); UNH (3.5 hrs?); Stonybrook (3.5-4 hrs., depending on traffic); & Vermont (3.5 hrs?).

[alum73]

I don't think it would be anywhere but in SEFCU Arena

[UA_MA_2000]

I tentatively agree with you, though I'm not sure why yet. If it were going to be at the SEFCU Arena, I don't think we'd host a tournament until we get an upgrade in the concessions realm. Thoughts?

[Dane Pound]

After going to the tournament when it was at Northeastern and at the BUMA hockey place I don't think the AE could find fault with the concessions at the CU. I think we could be a fine host school if given the chance.

[purplehaze]

After going to the tournament when it was at Northeastern and at the BUMA hockey place I don't think the AE could find fault with the concessions at the CU. I think we could be a fine host school if given the chance.

To paraphrase Will Brown...and others over the years.................."why not us?"