Use of fields by "rival" neighbors

[jalidanefan]

Good grief posters on the Soccer thread get some perspective on the use of facilities by looking at history. We have used RPI's, Sienna's and Union's and even high school facilities in the past. How often has our poor field hockey and lax teams had to play there when snow and rain made our fields unusable! Our current track is so poor I can see us having to use RPI's or Union's facility soon. Be careful of burning bridges you might have to cross later. A friendly rivalry should include opportunities to show friendship, collegiality, ... it makes the rivalry more fun and makes sure we all know that it's about sport and students not you and me. And one last thing - when a thread is started to celebrate the efforts of our student-athletes please dont ruin it with mindless griping - start your own gripe thread like this one lol.

[Patch]

jalidanefan - Good post but some of our bretheren don't see thing the way you do - friendly rivalry???- is their such a thing.

 

I have no problem with that other school using our facilities, there may come a time when????

 

The RPIs and Unions are different because they are DIII and rarely play us.

 

That other school in its ultimate wisdom built a single multi purpose facility and failed to get support from the community to have them lit, really intelligent.

 

We have an all purpose athletic department, they have a one sport program the other teams are just there so there one team can play.

 

But I for one support your general statement we should open our facilities to others when they are in a pinch, we have the facilities why not maximize their potentail.

[GreatDanes06]

agreed...this is a non-issue to me...i don't care. It's not like Siena is coming to UA to play the first round of an NCAA Lacrosse Tournament (cough...if they every make it...cough cough).

 

silly issue if you ask me.

[bob87]

What difference does it make if Siena "rents" our fields when we aren't using them as long as the payment covers the cost of removing the "Siena stench" from the field. It is not like we have to put garbage bags over the seats when they use our facility to make them feel at home.

Also I have seen AAU and high schools using UA's facilities at various times. The only differences with Siena using them is the Siena team isn't as good as the high schools or the aau and there aren't as many spectators.

[olddog71]

agreed...this is a non-issue to me...i don't care. It's not like Siena is coming to UA to play the first round of an NCAA Lacrosse Tournament (cough...if they every make it...cough cough).

 

silly issue if you ask me.

 

Whoa! Maybe not so silly. I won't speak for other people, but the points I made on the discussion about facilities spoke to the hypocrisy I see from many Siena fans on the same issue. Please don't call my view silly.

 

One of the major bones of contention I had on the issue concerned the annual UA-Siena men's basketball game. I'm not going to repeat the whole spiel on their arguments versus ours on the old contracts that regulated that game, but many points about facilities are cogent to this discussion here on facilities. We've heard the garbage about how we must play in "their" building, and they get to dictate all the terms because their team is far superior and "their" facility is far superior, etc., etc. The major reason why the annual game is played in the TUC is because it's the only place that can accommodate the expected crowd. It does not revolve around "whose" building it is, nor who has the superior record. It's held in a community building. Several of us UA fans complained about the issue, and the new contract has adequately addressed most of my concerns. For me and others, settling that issue on facilities was of great importance.

 

The other argument on facilities we are currently having concerns the issue of the football stadium. I think virtually all of us here would support the idea of building a new stadium at UA. One of the arguments that make the issue more politically palatable is that the facility could be used for non-football venues, such as community events. As a state-sponsored institution, we have to support the use of it for non-UA events. Some people, however - including many Siena fans - do not support the construction of a new field, and have made their views very public. Why should they be forced to support an athletic project for a state institution? And we all here know the answer to that challenge. Again, the issue of facilities is very important.

 

I do agree with jalidedane, though, on the original intention of the thread. We should have been discussing the successes of the men's soccer team (which, by the way, got beat badly today). Some of us did hijack that thread, and for my part in that I apologize.

[alum73]

A couple luntic fans complaining about funding issues shouldn't stop us from renting out our facilities and creating the funds necessary for us to continue our athletic programs. I just ignore them. Bosiydid, just can't do it. He really likes to debate them. It's not worth it to me.

[Clickclack]

I don't mind them using our fields.....except they have NO LEG TO STAND ON SLAMMING US FOR USING PUBLIC FUNDS TO BUILD OUR FACILITIES. If you are THAT against it, don't use the public facilities. The Siena board is full of hypocrites, without mentioning any names.

 

You can't slam us on getting public funding to improve our facilities and then come over and use them on a regular basis. I call BS on Siena and some of their fans.

[uofalbany]

What difference does it make if Siena "rents" our fields when we aren't using them as long as the payment covers the cost of removing the "Siena stench" from the field. It is not like we have to put garbage bags over the seats when they use our facility to make them feel at home.

Also I have seen AAU and high schools using UA's facilities at various times. The only differences with Siena using them is the Siena team isn't as good as the high schools or the aau and there aren't as many spectators.

 

 

Damn, I had a good laugh with that one!

 

 

The other argument on facilities we are currently having concerns the issue of the football stadium. I think virtually all of us here would support the idea of building a new stadium at UA. One of the arguments that make the issue more politically palatable is that the facility could be used for non-football venues, such as community events. As a state-sponsored institution, we have to support the use of it for non-UA events. Some people, however - including many Siena fans - do not support the construction of a new field, and have made their views very public. Why should they be forced to support an athletic project for a state institution? And we all here know the answer to that challenge. Again, the issue of facilities is very important.

 

It certainly should be used for community events, and it will be. Just like most issues, when someone doesn't benefit from state funding, they usually moan, bitch, and complain about why they need to pay for the thing. Seeing that the typical NY citizen will probably be forking out about 1/500,000 of a penny to pay for the stadium, it's worth a bitch session.... right?

 

When their teams come rent our fields, I see it this way.

It's like the kindergarden class taking a field trip to see what the High School is like.