dlsiouxfan Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 I know for a fact that once the women's hockey team went to a full budget there was a 30% cut in budget for the men's and women's basketball department. Tell me how that is good for the athletic department! what is the attendence for whockey-- 250 to 500 people and how many of those tickets are parents, giveaways etc. I am not against title 9 but I was one who was against whockey being d1 because of the effect it would have on all other programs including women's. That program will NEVER make $$$$$ it will always be a hinderance on the department! Agreed, starting women's hockey was probably the most shortsighted move UND administration ever made. Their had to be some other women's sport we could have started that wouldn't chew up cash like women's hockey does. Having it is basically like burning money and it doesn't matter how much we ever win it'll never pay it's way. Secondly, for all the resources we're throwing into it we better start to expect more bang for our buck. Their needs to be some accountability at the coaching level, if any other program that was getting the budget women's hockey gets consistently underperforms like they do their coach would be searching the want ads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigGreyAnt41 Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Secondly, for all the resources we're throwing into it we better start to expect more bang for our buck. Their needs to be some accountability at the coaching level, if any other program that was getting the budget women's hockey gets consistently underperforms like they do their coach would be searching the want ads. The program is only in it's third year. You have to cut them a bit of slack. If it's still happening in another 2-3 years, then maybe it's time to start thinking.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southpaw Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Agreed, starting women's hockey was probably the most shortsighted move UND administration ever made. Their had to be some other women's sport we could have started that wouldn't chew up cash like women's hockey does. Having it is basically like burning money and it doesn't matter how much we ever win it'll never pay it's way. Secondly, for all the resources we're throwing into it we better start to expect more bang for our buck. Their needs to be some accountability at the coaching level, if any other program that was getting the budget women's hockey gets consistently underperforms like they do their coach would be searching the want ads. i'm guessing, but i believe that the system for playoff hockey for women is the same as the men. right now, UND doesn't get any money if their men's team makes it to the frozen four. this is because we are not a d-1 school. if UND goes d1, then that will change. the same can be expected with womens hockey. consistently there are 3-4 womens teams each year (umd, um, ohio state, etc) who can be expected to be in the wfrozen four. when (not if) UND makes it to the frozen four, not only will fan attendance be up, but we will start to get money from participating in the event. UND makes the jump and the two sports that were d1 before any other north dakota sport will start bringing in more money. womens hockey is a feeder sport. it's like lacrosse. most high schools in north dakota don't have womens hockey teams. many in minnesota do. with THE major university in the state adding the sport, it will only add to the number of teams at high schools. the sport is relatively young and much like lacrosse can only gain support. give it some time, you can't expect the team to be making the playoffs in the first 5 years, maybe even the first 10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlsiouxfan Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 Good, I hope so because something has to stop the bleeding when it comes to that program. My only real opposition to the way we've handled women's hockey is that we took money from highly successful programs (WBB, MBB) to fund a program that's been a major disappointment. I think a large part of the decision was due to the influence REA had in the athletic deparment at the time. In many ways the REA has been both a godsend and a thorn in the side for UND athletics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachdags Posted February 5, 2006 Share Posted February 5, 2006 I have a Hard Time with "Intended to be a Volleyball and Basketball Practice Facility"... If that is indeed the Case,Why are the Side Courts Not Properly Lighted, Can't Scrimmage unless on the Main Court-Side Courts Too hazardous because of Bathroom Entrance Wall Locations, No Side Scoreboards for practice.?,Why built a Practice Facility with Sheet roock Walls.? Already had to repair numerous times becauce of Damage with Flying Bodies and Balls.? ,Where is The Drinking Fountain-athletics do not need Water?..And Then why Spend all the extra Money On Leather Seats-Why not Telecopic Bleachers for more Room..?Inadequate Training Room Facilities and Weight Room Just got made from old Storage Room, No Equipment Room to Speak Of..? Very Poor is Design in my Estimation... Also I Believe the Mankato Bresin Arena was Built for less than 17 Million..? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huskies679 Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Womens hockey will never make money. Look at The University of Minnesota Womens' team. They are one of the top programs in the country and they can't even fill a small arena. It is a complete joke! Where is the "equity"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachdags Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Count me as one who didn't get to the St. Cloud game - I had a late start because of work and then heard it was sold out. This is crazy. I beleive many fans were turned away or discouraged from trying to go. What a pathetic way to build team support. Does anyone from the athletic dept. or the Englestead even care. On the other hand, playing in the big Ralph isn't the final solution either. We lose a considerable home court advantage in there because of the empty space. The poor planning that went into the Betty seems to have put us in a corner. When I heard the capacity during the construction phase, I couldn't believe it. Everyone I talked to felt that it was too small. I believe that it was rushed without much planning for the world jrs. Speaking of the World Juniors - has any of the supposed benefits materialized. The Ralph seemed to get a monopoly on the food and drink sales for the tournament, shutting out local businesses. What hapened to the profits? Now, a year later, have we seen the massive business boost we were promised - has it "showcased" Grand Forks in such a way that many new recruits are comming here just because of the exposure? I think we were sold a bill of goods on that one. It was a nice tournament, but not worth the fallout - especially now that we are stuck with the Betty. Another issue that has been mentioned on this topic is the effect of the Ralph on the Athletic Dept. budget - If this is topic for a new thread I apologise - but i would love to hear an explaination from someone who knows the facts (which I don't) as to how we could be broke. The football attendance since the move to the Alarus is about double - plus playoff games - Hockey capacity is about double also. Add to that increased ticket prices and the push to force people into the Fighting Sioux club in order to get tickets. Then add the increase in consessions - How can we be broke? Is women's hockey that expensive - Things just don't add up in my head - can anyone explain it to me? Is the Ralph not the great deal we thought? What is the relationship between the Ralph and the Athletic Dept. financially - who gets what revinue? Where did the money to build the Betty come from? who controls the profits - I would really like to hear from someone who knows. I have always Liked the "Irish"...good post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Agreed, starting women's hockey was probably the most shortsighted move UND administration ever made. This said one week before the Olympics, when women's hockey gets a worldwide audience. Some of Olympian women hockey players will one day, likely in Vancouver in 2010, be UND athletes. That is not shortsighted, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I have a Hard Time with "Intended to be a Volleyball and Basketball Practice Facility"... If that is indeed the Case,Why are the Side Courts Not Properly Lighted, Can't Scrimmage unless on the Main Court-Side Courts Too hazardous because of Bathroom Entrance Wall Locations, No Side Scoreboards for practice.?,Why built a Practice Facility with Sheet roock Walls.? Already had to repair numerous times becauce of Damage with Flying Bodies and Balls.? ,Where is The Drinking Fountain-athletics do not need Water?..And Then why Spend all the extra Money On Leather Seats-Why not Telecopic Bleachers for more Room..?Inadequate Training Room Facilities and Weight Room Just got made from old Storage Room, No Equipment Room to Speak Of..? Very Poor is Design in my Estimation...How much sense would it have made for a city to have a 12,000 seat arena (Ralph in BB config), a 8,000 seat arena for BB (Alerus configuration), and a 5-6,000 seat Betty just for basketball? It wouldn't have been politically possible or fiscally prudent for that matter. Most of the issues listed above can be fixed with a relatively minor $'s, buying a portable water cooler, and getting the REA staff to move out. Also I Believe the Mankato Bresin Arena was Built for less than 17 Million..?Their website said $18 mill, which with steel price increase would have been $25 mill in 2004. Doubling the size of the original Betty would have more than doubled its cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlsiouxfan Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 This said one week before the Olympics, when women's hockey gets a worldwide audience. Some of Olympian women hockey players will one day, likely in Vancouver in 2010, be UND athletes. That is not shortsighted, IMO. That may be so but I still don't see how that's going to help us pay for it. Look at Minnesota they have they top program in the nation and it loses money. Also as to the expected performance level of the team, women's soccer was started about the same time and has seen the postseason a number of times despite dramatically less funding than the women's hockey program and at least three different head coaches. If we're going to pour money into this hand over fist then we better get some results. I know we started it to manage title IX but their had to be some other women's sport that doesn't eat up revenue like women's hockey does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farce poobah Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I'm not sure how this thread turned into a referendum on women's hockey. Are we really blaming women's hockey for the Betty? To the original question, I agree entirely with the idea that this is a poorly planned facility. UND Basketball should have a big-enough place to play (5000-6000 capacity which has been filled in the past), that has a great atmosphere (the Ralph for basketball doesn't qualify), serves as a home court advantage (splitting games between 2 home facilities seemed to hurt the teams' performance) and that supplies all the other basic amenities for fans (enough bathrooms, aisle space, etc). Question is whether the Betty can be improved and what it will take. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachdags Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Star2City....You make some Valid Points, but they are definetly some problems here that may or may not spell doom for UND athletics as we have come to know it... We can say all we want that The Betty was not to replace Hyslop, But lets not kid ourselfs Hyslop needed to be Replaced or Refurbished, Someone Choose the "Betty" as part of that Option...Who? The REA continues to be a problem when it comes to UND Athletics, It has is its own way Cost us a Hockey Coach, Athletic Director, alot of Support from what I believe has been the Backbone of Sioux Athletics, the Small Bussinessman... Although it has made some Changes of Late, was the REA supposed to be a Hockey Facility or..... A Bar and Resturant, A Banquet Facility,Sporting Goods Store, Travel Agency, Concert and Entertainment Venue, Satelitte Tv Sales Company,Advertising Agency, Publisher, Ticket Agency,Private Party and Wedding Receptions, and as we saw at the World Juniors last year a Complete Entertainment Night Club Facility... All this and,It continues to Lose money at Least not support UND Athletics in the Way That I beleive as Ralph had Intended....(God I wish Ralph was Still Here) Our two Facilites(Alerus and REA) Continue to Fight with each other, which hurts the community as a whole, or at least we could be more productive if they could get along.... It is very unfortunate that we could not have waited to Build a Facility to replace Hsylop that could benifit UND Athletics...If in the long run we move up, the Betty will be almost useless.... But then again until UND can get control of its own Athletic Department in Funding and Budgeting, We could be Re-Named the University of REA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeftyZL Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 The REA continues to be a problem when it comes to UND Athletics, It has is its own way Cost us a Hockey Coach, Athletic Director, alot of Support from what I believe has been the Backbone of Sioux Athletics, the Small Bussinessman... Although it has made some Changes of Late, was the REA supposed to be a Hockey Facility or..... A Bar and Resturant, A Banquet Facility,Sporting Goods Store, Travel Agency, Concert and Entertainment Venue, Satelitte Tv Sales Company,Advertising Agency, Publisher, Ticket Agency,Private Party and Wedding Receptions, and as we saw at the World Juniors last year a Complete Entertainment Night Club Facility... Since when was REA responsible for Roger Thomas leaving UND as athletic to take the position of Commissioner of the North Central Conference? I don't understand that point...Please explan. It has in no way cost us a hockey coach, everyone knew that Dean Blais had already looked at moving up to the pro ranks when the Wild and Columbus were formed as NHL teams. He is an unbelieveable coach that took advantage of an opportunity given to him. Heck, we were lucky to keep him as long as we did. He could have left 3 years earlier. As for your second paragraph, find me a hockey facility in the world that doesn't act as a "sporting goods store, ticket agency, etc"....There isn't one, with the capatilities/technology of REA, that won't pursue "other" money-making interests. At the World Junior Tournament last year, maybe you were just made aware of what hockey fans call "true hockey fans"....Sure they were loud, but they weren't rude(not to me or anyone I talked to), they like to drink and support their team, and they showed us the potential atmosphere of what the REA COULD BE like when fans work together to support their team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlsiouxfan Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I believe what Coachdags is referring to is how REA has influenced decisions regarding UND athletics. A number of these which now appear are going to cost us great sums of money in the future (i.e. women's hockey, the Betty). It wouldn't be such a big deal but now our athletic department is in the red and REA needs to share a large portion of the blame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachdags Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Lefty... RT just got tired of Dealing with REA, esp when they Control the Athletic Budget you are resposible for....It was a contributing Factor to his decision to pursue other oppurtunities... Dean could have been happy being the Head Coach of the Fighting Sioux for Life..It was His Dream Job...He turned down many Offers over the Years that Included The gophers and NHL...Why move when he did? Plain and Simple he did not Like going to work at The REA...Fighting over Ice Time,Scheduling,and control over what he and we all Perceived was supposed to be a Sioux hockey Arena 1st....Were your aware that Mr Berning Called the Police on Dean to settle one such dispute...The straw that Forced the move...? As for real Hockey Fans..I am not talking about Beer Sales in the Arena....I'm refering to the NIGHTCLUB called the "Betty"...by the way Where did our Mens and Womens BBall Teams Practice when there so called practice facility was turned into a NIGHTCLUB..DANCEFLOOR for 12 days/nights in a row? As Far as other money Making oppurtunities..? Fly the Ralph.com,Lost Money...Their Sat TV Venture, Lost Money...Sunday Bruches on Mothers Day and Easter, Lost Money....Their Concerts Promotions, Lost Money...Sioux Illustrated,Lost Money...Hosted the biggest event of the lifetime "World Juniors"....Lost Money?(we are not sure,they wont tell us).....Getting the Pattern Here...If Betty herself did not Donate to Andre Agassi's Charitable Fund ,the Tennis Match with Andy Roddick, would not have been possible and Lost Money... We are Lucky enough to Have a 100 million dollar donated Facility, That in the last 4 years , has doubled the Attendance for Hockey Games...At 3X the ticket Price...Sells 48 Suite for over 1 million dollars a year....Has substanially increased concession revenue ,my guess at least 10x greater then the Old Ralph...We (UND) pay to play are games there...and Guess What....They Lose Money...or at Best have not been able to contribute to our athletic department revenues their expected amount, as to why UND athletics is in the RED..? Maybe its just me but I see a potential Problem Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Looking at this from a profit and loss point of view, and using the 2004 EADA data, if you only want UND playing sports that it profits at then say good-bye to everything except mens hockey and womens basketball. And I've given the easy solution to you all already: Rework old REA into a new basketball facility. It held 6067 for hockey so it'd hold more for basketball. If The Betty isn't good enough, why aren't basketball fans out raising the funds for an arena? It's not like they're short from paying for The Betty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND92,96 Posted February 6, 2006 Author Share Posted February 6, 2006 Looking at this from a profit and loss point of view, and using the 2004 EADA data, if you only want UND playing sports that it profits at then say good-bye to everything except mens hockey and womens basketball. And I've given the easy solution to you all already: Rework old REA into a new basketball facility. It held 6067 for hockey so it'd hold more for basketball. If The Betty isn't good enough, why aren't basketball fans out raising the funds for an arena? It's not like they're short from paying for The Betty. Wouldn't it have been cheaper to have refurbished Hyslop? 1. renovate locker rooms; 2. new seats with backs; 3. renovate bathrooms; 4. new sound system; 5. address heating and cooling issues; 6. other (I'm sure I'm missing some things). We're still talking a lot of money, but had we known then what we know now about the Betty, I think a lot of basketball fans and alums would have dug pretty deep to make it happen. And there wouldn't have been any rent paid to REA, and all ticket revenue would have gone directly to the athletic department. And the roughly $8 million that the Betty cost REA could have been used elsewhere, or eventually have gone back to UND (in theory, anyway). Everybody wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachdags Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Wouldn't it have been cheaper to have refurbished Hyslop? 1. renovate locker rooms; 2. new seats with backs; 3. renovate bathrooms; 4. new sound system; 5. address heating and cooling issues; 6. other (I'm sure I'm missing some things). We're still talking a lot of money, but had we known then what we know now about the Betty, I think a lot of basketball fans and alums would have dug pretty deep to make it happen. And there wouldn't have been any rent paid to REA, and all ticket revenue would have gone directly to the athletic department. And the roughly $8 million that the Betty cost REA could have been used elsewhere, or eventually have gone back to UND (in theory, anyway). Everybody wins. good points!....unforunately nobody asked us...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4siouxnow Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I maybe crazy, but was at the games Saturday at the Betty and saw none of the logistic problems that started this whole thread. It is a great facility and had a great atmosphere. I go to alot of games at alot of places I have been to most Big 12 and MVC schools for basketball games, and this is as good if not better than most. I don't get that everyone thinks they should be able to walk up the night of a game and buy a ticket, teams and programs that are successfull sell out their games with season ticket holders. If the Betty was sold out to season ticket holders for several seasons in a row then there would be an issue that there should be a movement for more seating. There should be a demand for tickets ahead of time not just the night of games. The crowd saturday night wasn't far off from the other games and the lines at concessions and the restrooms were not an issue, moving around the areana was not an issue. The beer was cold and the food good and the women's basketball great, I think the complaints on here are not justified and everyone needs to realize how good things realy are. A challenge to all lets see if the Betty could be sold out for the rest of the home games well before game day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Wouldn't it have been cheaper to have refurbished Hyslop? 1. renovate locker rooms; 2. new seats with backs; 3. renovate bathrooms; 4. new sound system; 5. address heating and cooling issues; 6. other (I'm sure I'm missing some things). We're still talking a lot of money, but had we known then what we know now about the Betty, I think a lot of basketball fans and alums would have dug pretty deep to make it happen. And there wouldn't have been any rent paid to REA, and all ticket revenue would have gone directly to the athletic department. And the roughly $8 million that the Betty cost REA could have been used elsewhere, or eventually have gone back to UND (in theory, anyway). Everybody wins. Not according to RT, back then, would've it been cheaper to redo the Hyslop. I heard him say it at Boosters. Part of the issue was renovation would have meant asbestos remediation work --> big bucks. (Asbestos is best left alone. It's fine if you leave it alone and don't mess with it. Once you tear into it you have to follow all of the OSHA and EPA regulations.) And all of those things could have been done. There's just one item not addressed in that list: Total (all sports) available training space. That issue wouldn't have been addressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legend334 Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Lefty... RT just got tired of Dealing with REA, esp when they Control the Athletic Budget you are resposible for....It was a contributing Factor to his decision to pursue other oppurtunities... Dean could have been happy being the Head Coach of the Fighting Sioux for Life..It was His Dream Job...He turned down many Offers over the Years that Included The gophers and NHL...Why move when he did? Plain and Simple he did not Like going to work at The REA...Fighting over Ice Time,Scheduling,and control over what he and we all Perceived was supposed to be a Sioux hockey Arena 1st....Were your aware that Mr Berning Called the Police on Dean to settle one such dispute...The straw that Forced the move...? As for real Hockey Fans..I am not talking about Beer Sales in the Arena....I'm refering to the NIGHTCLUB called the "Betty"...by the way Where did our Mens and Womens BBall Teams Practice when there so called practice facility was turned into a NIGHTCLUB..DANCEFLOOR for 12 days/nights in a row? As Far as other money Making oppurtunities..? Fly the Ralph.com,Lost Money...Their Sat TV Venture, Lost Money...Sunday Bruches on Mothers Day and Easter, Lost Money....Their Concerts Promotions, Lost Money...Sioux Illustrated,Lost Money...Hosted the biggest event of the lifetime "World Juniors"....Lost Money?(we are not sure,they wont tell us).....Getting the Pattern Here...If Betty herself did not Donate to Andre Agassi's Charitable Fund ,the Tennis Match with Andy Roddick, would not have been possible and Lost Money... We are Lucky enough to Have a 100 million dollar donated Facility, That in the last 4 years , has doubled the Attendance for Hockey Games...At 3X the ticket Price...Sells 48 Suite for over 1 million dollars a year....Has substanially increased concession revenue ,my guess at least 10x greater then the Old Ralph...We (UND) pay to play are games there...and Guess What....They Lose Money...or at Best have not been able to contribute to our athletic department revenues their expected amount, as to why UND athletics is in the RED..? Maybe its just me but I see a potential Problem I am not sure it was all REA to force the old AD out...irregardless....BTW World Juniors broke even is what REA is saying....and as far as Dean leaving...had even more to do with no one backing him with his problems with REA...Dean wanted a contract for life to coach UND...that is a fact!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legend334 Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Not according to RT, back then, would've it been cheaper to redo the Hyslop. I heard him say it at Boosters. Part of the issue was renovation would have meant asbestos remediation work --> big bucks. (Asbestos is best left alone. It's fine if you leave it alone and don't mess with it. Once you tear into it you have to follow all of the OSHA and EPA regulations.) And all of those things could have been done. There's just one item not addressed in that list: Total (all sports) available training space. That issue wouldn't have been addressed. The majority of asbestos according to plant services...is not in the walls...its between the floors...so as long as no renovation was done to take out floors...ie what the wellness center was planning on doing...there wouldnt have been a big risk, although they dont know whats in those walls until the get into them, that is what plant services says. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legend334 Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I am not sure it was all REA to force the old AD out...irregardless....BTW World Juniors broke even is what REA is saying....and as far as Dean leaving...had even more to do with no one backing him with his problems with REA...Dean wanted a contract for life to coach UND...that is a fact!! I forgot...hire a editor to Sioux Illustrated so now the gross loss can be 50,000 instead of 5 to 10 thousand!! BRILLIANT!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND Fan Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Guys, I agree with most points being made but.... we are where we are! We have the Betty, Hyslop won't be remodeled and the cost of refurbishing the old REA is huge - primarily due to problems with the structure itself, mostly the roof. The University simply is not going to sink $ into these old facilities! We might as well not waste our time talking about that! There is no question that the proper forethought was not put into the design of the Betty. They wanted to get it up in time for the Jrs. and they had a limited amount of $ available so that is what they spent! If you remember, they did launch a $500,000 or $1 million campaign to finish the building off as they knew they didn't have enough money to do so. The offices weren't furnished nor was the player's lounge, there were no weights in the weight room, the front foyer wasn't finished, etc. I don't think they had overwhelming success in their fundraising. Obviously, much more planning should have gone into the building. That, along with a good, well-planned fundraising effort would have resulted in a much better facility. But that didn't happen - we are where we are. We need to make the best out of what we have rather than worry about what should have happened. The Betty is a nice facility with some faults - primarily it is too small. It would appear to me that the answer is to add large bleachers at each end of the court. There is plenty of room and these wouldn't be bad seats - still close to the court, etc. Not a great solution but it is the only viable one other than moving back to the Ralph! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachdags Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Guys, I agree with most points being made but.... we are where we are! We have the Betty, Hyslop won't be remodeled and the cost of refurbishing the old REA is huge - primarily due to problems with the structure itself, mostly the roof. The University simply is not going to sink $ into these old facilities! We might as well not waste our time talking about that! There is no question that the proper forethought was not put into the design of the Betty. They wanted to get it up in time for the Jrs. and they had a limited amount of $ available so that is what they spent! If you remember, they did launch a $500,000 or $1 million campaign to finish the building off as they knew they didn't have enough money to do so. The offices weren't furnished nor was the player's lounge, there were no weights in the weight room, the front foyer wasn't finished, etc. I don't think they had overwhelming success in their fundraising. Obviously, much more planning should have gone into the building. That, along with a good, well-planned fundraising effort would have resulted in a much better facility. But that didn't happen - we are where we are. We need to make the best out of what we have rather than worry about what should have happened. The Betty is a nice facility with some faults - primarily it is too small. It would appear to me that the answer is to add large bleachers at each end of the court. There is plenty of room and these wouldn't be bad seats - still close to the court, etc. Not a great solution but it is the only viable one other than moving back to the Ralph! Amen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.