It's going to look absolutely incredible. I swear we have some of the stupidest and bitchiest fans in all of the world's creation.
Seen dis? New aerial of DWS....
- Thread starter Thexder
- Start date
Seriously. Don't mean to pile on or anything, but people that don't understand design ALWAYS want **** perfectly symmetrical, parallel and simple. The best architecture takes advantage of asymmetry and even uncomfortable angles to achieve interesting and dramatic spaces. I personally like the offset, and the space it creates. I don't want to look like "every other SEC stadium" I want to look like Mississippi State. Everybody else can go 17 themselves.
Endzone looks pretty flat across the field to me. And then bowled on both sides.
To meet the older parts of stadium? Where are you seeing a slanted endzone? Are you high?
Now if you are talking about the portion that contains the entry stairwell, offices, meeting rooms, elevators, etc., Then yes it is at an angle. An angle that allows us to maximize the use of space, while at the same time creating an aesthetically unique look for our stadium and university. Did you want us to make it look like other bowled in endzones? I prefer being unique and doing things that haven't been done before. For example, the loge seats in a college stadium.
I surely hope you are hopped up on something to be getting this worked up over a beautiful new structure on our campus. I'm still looking for that slanted endzone, and I'm not quite sure Slive or the SEC would allow us to do that. Maybe if Alabama slants their endzone, it will become accepted.
To meet the older parts of stadium? Where are you seeing a slanted endzone? Are you high?
Now if you are talking about the portion that contains the entry stairwell, offices, meeting rooms, elevators, etc., Then yes it is at an angle. An angle that allows us to maximize the use of space, while at the same time creating an aesthetically unique look for our stadium and university. Did you want us to make it look like other bowled in endzones? I prefer being unique and doing things that haven't been done before. For example, the loge seats in a college stadium.
I surely hope you are hopped up on something to be getting this worked up over a beautiful new structure on our campus. I'm still looking for that slanted endzone, and I'm not quite sure Slive or the SEC would allow us to do that. Maybe if Alabama slants their endzone, it will become accepted.
And the answer is...Who gives a ****? It is new. It is bad ***. We are expanding. We are M-State. There are tons of other things to ***** about, leave our progress alone.
I think Wicked's thought is it could be in the same vein as the Hunter Henry where being aesthetically unique might not be the best looking for long term plans. With that being said, I completely disagree with Wicked.
Sorry I'm late on this one, but what is this fool talking about? What angle? What other angle would be appropriate?
Very few people will notice that. The costs associated with making it look perfectly symmetrical from the air is not worth it. I like the way it looks.
Completely agree here. I wouldn't have been able to tell you that was Alabama's stadium upon first glance if the poster hadn't labeled it. I've never been, and I'm sure it's great, high capacity, and as other threads have mentioned they work the jumbo-trons to perfection apparently, but it's just a nondescript bowl. Fenway, Wrigley, Old Yankee Stadium, Camden Yards (doesn't State have a connection to that one?), Mile High, Gillette Stadium, Lambeau, LSU, Clemson, UGA, USCe, USC, I don't need to go on. They're all recognizable upon first glance when watching a game. Now I agree, it doesn't need to look like Hunter Henry, but it will be distinguishable from a bland bowl.
I still have no idea what that thing on Gillette field is. Is it a bridge? A Mach 3 razor?
I can't call it the Q, that's what I call The "W". It would have been nice to have the new part on the south end since most people enter from that end, but I understand that it made more since to bowl the north end.
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w
unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <woNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <wontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <wontVertAlignCellWithSp/> <wontBreakConstrainedForcedTables/> <wontVertAlignInTxbx/> <w:Word11KerningPairs/> <w:CachedColBalance/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->Good thing you are not an expert in urban or campus design. The end zone is angled to keep the existing street (which is a heavy used street), existing buildings, and a federally funded bike path. Squaring the building off to the end zones is about as stupid as angling the front of your house to match the angle of your couch. Thank god most architects don't design buildings from the vantage point of space. I would rather they be concerned with the appearance at ground level. For the sake of your sanity, I hope they make sure that the soap dispensers are lined up symmetrically. "It is the pervading law of all things organic, and inorganic, of all things physical and metaphysical, of all things human and all things super-human, of all true manifestations of the head, of the heart, of the soul, that the life is recognizable in its expression, that form ever follows function. This is the law."
-Louis Sullivan
Last edited by a moderator:
because im bored, ill kinda side with wp in the fact that i initially wanted a traditional bowl shape. i mean, why wouldnt you want to make it symmetrical? initially, does it make more sense to move a road that at mosts costs a few hundred thousand to slightly alter its path (a total guess) OR or should you totally try to work around an ill-placed road for a 80 million dollar expansion?
symmetry is SO overrated:
lets not act like the crux of what wp is arguing is THAT insane...its not. as a lurker, there were many that were not exactly comfortable with knowing the ez was going to be asymmetric even after the plans came out.
now that it is in place, i can also appreciate the uniqueness that it brings and in addition, to the unique plaza that will be created because of the angles. its going to look and be top notch and very aesthetically pleasing. but, bitching about it at this point doesnt make a lot of sense. i have gone from being a little irritated, to being skeptical, to being neutral, to appreciating it as a unique feature. probably the same rout many of you have taken, but it certainly wasnt a consensus "Q" approval. sometimes, weird angles throw people off, but i dont think it will be seen as a weird angle because the scale will be so big and from the outside, you wont see the field and its orientation. the only thing that will give it away will be the angle of the nez jumbotron.
it will look a little wonky from the outside:
so, to avoid this, perhaps we should just go straight to the 2 mini jumbotrons in the ez corners:
to summarize, i like what we have done and i want my cut if "the Q" ever takes off, but initially, i was not exactly happy knowing it wasnt going to be normal/symmetrical. that said, it looks outstanding minus the unseen ez jumbotron.
symmetry is SO overrated:
lets not act like the crux of what wp is arguing is THAT insane...its not. as a lurker, there were many that were not exactly comfortable with knowing the ez was going to be asymmetric even after the plans came out.
now that it is in place, i can also appreciate the uniqueness that it brings and in addition, to the unique plaza that will be created because of the angles. its going to look and be top notch and very aesthetically pleasing. but, bitching about it at this point doesnt make a lot of sense. i have gone from being a little irritated, to being skeptical, to being neutral, to appreciating it as a unique feature. probably the same rout many of you have taken, but it certainly wasnt a consensus "Q" approval. sometimes, weird angles throw people off, but i dont think it will be seen as a weird angle because the scale will be so big and from the outside, you wont see the field and its orientation. the only thing that will give it away will be the angle of the nez jumbotron.
it will look a little wonky from the outside:
so, to avoid this, perhaps we should just go straight to the 2 mini jumbotrons in the ez corners:
to summarize, i like what we have done and i want my cut if "the Q" ever takes off, but initially, i was not exactly happy knowing it wasnt going to be normal/symmetrical. that said, it looks outstanding minus the unseen ez jumbotron.
Man I have no idea what you are looking at. From a design stand point everything is functional. Moving the road makes no sense. There is no reason to do so.
And linear stuff is boring and **** design. Thats for civil engineers.
Now that building with the palm trees down the street still has me confused.
And linear stuff is boring and **** design. Thats for civil engineers.
Now that building with the palm trees down the street still has me confused.