Moderators: rtb, kmax, SonomaCat
That first sentence was the kick to the balls I needed to finish off this afternoon at work.Bozcat003 wrote:Sounds like he backed out of the job as well
Kidding, but does anyone know when he officially starts? I really want to hear his vision for MSU athletics and a timeline for how things will get started . . . MSU has new excitement around it and I hope we can use this excitement for our advantage.
DDDDUUUUUUDDDEEE.... That's so not funny, I agree with Hiline, I actually called it a day.Bozcat003 wrote:Sounds like he backed out of the job as well
Kidding, but does anyone know when he officially starts? I really want to hear his vision for MSU athletics and a timeline for how things will get started . . . MSU has new excitement around it and I hope we can use this excitement for our advantage.
Costello developed a plan for raising funds at SDSU. I saw it while doing a search on him. I'm guessing he'll be using it here. It was some sort of pledge sheet as I recall. Maybe it's common, but I'd never seen anything like it before.Colter_Nuanez wrote:I was down at the school all afternoon. Leon Costello started today. He will meet with 28 influential boosters in Great Falls later this week.
Shroyer, the track and the Fieldhouse were recently remodeled. The tennis building is decent (I think). So maybe they should add a sport.KittieKop wrote:I agree that it needs to be on the radar of priority projects to get done, but also in fairness SDSU's is a multipurpose facility - field turf and a running track. While MSU doesn't need a running track, having the fieldhouse, maybe there's a possibility of combining purposes with another MSU sport and leveraging its usage?
DaCats21 wrote:Shroyer, the track and the Fieldhouse were recently remodeled. The tennis building is decent (I think). So maybe they should add a sport.KittieKop wrote:I agree that it needs to be on the radar of priority projects to get done, but also in fairness SDSU's is a multipurpose facility - field turf and a running track. While MSU doesn't need a running track, having the fieldhouse, maybe there's a possibility of combining purposes with another MSU sport and leveraging its usage?
How about an indoor practice facility/weight room/wrestling building...
Speaking of the tennis building, I don't understand why we would need such a campaign drive to build a indoor practice facility. Besides the turf ( which may or may not be less expensive than the tennis surface) a building like the tennis facility is all that would be needed and I don't remember it being a discussion to raise money for the tennis building. I don't know where those funds came from but it didn't seem like a major project at all.DaCats21 wrote:Shroyer, the track and the Fieldhouse were recently remodeled. The tennis building is decent (I think). So maybe they should add a sport.KittieKop wrote:I agree that it needs to be on the radar of priority projects to get done, but also in fairness SDSU's is a multipurpose facility - field turf and a running track. While MSU doesn't need a running track, having the fieldhouse, maybe there's a possibility of combining purposes with another MSU sport and leveraging its usage?
How about an indoor practice facility/weight room/wrestling building...
They could just leave the grass in Specs year round.HelenaCat95 wrote:DaCats21 wrote:Shroyer, the track and the Fieldhouse were recently remodeled. The tennis building is decent (I think). So maybe they should add a sport.KittieKop wrote:I agree that it needs to be on the radar of priority projects to get done, but also in fairness SDSU's is a multipurpose facility - field turf and a running track. While MSU doesn't need a running track, having the fieldhouse, maybe there's a possibility of combining purposes with another MSU sport and leveraging its usage?
How about an indoor practice facility/weight room/wrestling building...
I would like to see an indoor practice facility/indoor tailgating facility.
Based on some quick calculations, a conservative estimate is that an indoor facility with a full-size football field would need to have at least four times as much square footage inside as the current indoor tennis facility with four tennis courts, plus additional room for equipment storage and whatever else they might need inside the space. I'm guessing that the cost for a useful facility is substantially higher than whatever the tennis building cost when you factor in the size and cost of the turf inside.Cats15 wrote:Speaking of the tennis building, I don't understand why we would need such a campaign drive to build a indoor practice facility. Besides the turf ( which may or may not be less expensive than the tennis surface) a building like the tennis facility is all that would be needed and I don't remember it being a discussion to raise money for the tennis building. I don't know where those funds came from but it didn't seem like a major project at all.DaCats21 wrote:Shroyer, the track and the Fieldhouse were recently remodeled. The tennis building is decent (I think). So maybe they should add a sport.KittieKop wrote:I agree that it needs to be on the radar of priority projects to get done, but also in fairness SDSU's is a multipurpose facility - field turf and a running track. While MSU doesn't need a running track, having the fieldhouse, maybe there's a possibility of combining purposes with another MSU sport and leveraging its usage?
How about an indoor practice facility/weight room/wrestling building...
