Jump to content

Football facility estimated to cost $91.9 million


aubiefifty
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, AUBourne said:

Do they know they can object and ask for a better product for the money being spent or did they just lazily accept the vendors first proposal?  Have they looked at what other schools have in place? The Oregon facility was $68 million. There is no comparison between the two. 

https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2013/7/31/4574556/oregon-football-building-new

Yep,  Dont know what to tell you besides the people i know (graduated with ) that have left that office had a better eye for what looks good because your talent and ability isnt valued as much as who you know or filling specific quotas 

 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites





28 minutes ago, auskip07 said:

The university architect shaped/approved the design....     we have had more talented people at the helm in the past.   

Do you really think these athletes give a hoot about how that building looks on the outside? 

All they care about is what's inside and is Auburn giving the same or better perks with it that other schools that are recruiting them...

And why would I want it to look like Disney? That's NOT Auburn's style...Oregon..yes...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, steeleagle said:

Do you really think these athletes give a hoot about how that building looks on the outside? 

All they care about is what's inside and is Auburn giving the same or better perks with it that other schools that are recruiting them...

And why would I want it to look like Disney? That's NOT Auburn's style...Oregon..yes...

I dont think thats what his quote is saying   but  i think we all want nice looking buildings on campus and if you're spending the money you damn sure want it 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, auskip07 said:

I dont think thats what his quote is saying   but  i think we all want nice looking buildings on campus and if you're spending the money you damn sure want it 

 

I agree, and the building is nice...but it's no 'gotcha' or 'snazzy appealing' design which it seems some wanted. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, steeleagle said:

I agree, and the building is nice...but it's no 'gotcha' or 'snazzy appealing' design which it seems some wanted. 

After seeing the new business building with the roof top terrace i would have expected  that type appeal for the Athletic center.    

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, auskip07 said:

I dont do this kind of work but currently we slammed with work and turning stuff down left and right,  Cost of labor (with covid restriction),  Steel is very expensive,   2017 wasnt a slow time but  lots of factors come into play with these facility's.   

I understand that, but that does not explain $40 million.  It just doesn't, unless we blindly pretend that it does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For $90 plus million, I should want to stop in the street and be in awe when I approach the building for the first time.  Seriously. Just blindly pretending that it makes sense is what has this country in the financial position it is in today.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, steeleagle said:

Do you really think these athletes give a hoot about how that building looks on the outside? 

All they care about is what's inside and is Auburn giving the same or better perks with it that other schools that are recruiting them...

And why would I want it to look like Disney? That's NOT Auburn's style...Oregon..yes...

For that kind of money, it should be shock and awe.  I agree that the kids want toys and they are clearly getting them.  However, kids also like a grand entrance and adults have to pay for it all.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole point of the building is to impress recruits. So I would think a snazzy, awe inspiring design is the goal.  I would also think the one advantage to being late to the Football Only Facility party is I can have the better product than the competition.

 

1 hour ago, steeleagle said:

I agree, and the building is nice...but it's no 'gotcha' or 'snazzy appealing' design which it seems some wanted. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, steeleagle said:

Do you really think these athletes give a hoot about how that building looks on the outside? 

All they care about is what's inside and is Auburn giving the same or better perks with it that other schools that are recruiting them...

And why would I want it to look like Disney? That's NOT Auburn's style...Oregon..yes...

It’s not just for the athletes.

do you think players care what Jordan Hare looks like?

tunnel vision is not a good look.

architecture should always be high priority. And as far as the furnishings will it really be on level with others or just barely catching up?

Edited by TigerOne
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/28/2021 at 2:38 PM, AU9377 said:

How can Clemson build a "state of the art facility" that they opened in 2017 for $55 million and less than 5 years later we build a comparable facility for $91 million?  I am all for having the best, I just don't believe the best costs $91 million.

I'm thinking it is because we are building another indoor practice field and Clemson did not.

Edited by AuburnKev
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, lala said:

Are they competitively pricing the building or just negotiating?    That could be an extra 5-10mm

Surely Auburn doesn't do anything silly like a sole source contract to BL Harbert. Has to be competitive bids by state law, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think some costs could be/can be offset via some cross-marketing/sponsorships (e.g. Garage Band Player Lounge brought to you by Apple Computer, Performance Nutrition Center sponsored by GNC and Whole Foods, Kinesiology Analytics Lab by EA Sports). Barber Shop by Sports Clips. Just expect a school with a business school to apply marketing and development best practices. Might not offset $40M, but might offset a few $M in costs.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, AUx said:

Do you think some costs could be/can be offset via some cross-marketing/sponsorships (e.g. Garage Band Player Lounge brought to you by Apple Computer, Performance Nutrition Center sponsored by GNC and Whole Foods, Kinesiology Analytics Lab by EA Sports). Barber Shop by Sports Clips. Just expect a school with a business school to apply marketing and development best practices. Might not offset $40M, but might offset a few $M in costs.

Snack bar sponsored by Little Debbie!

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AUx said:

Surely Auburn doesn't do anything silly like a sole source contract to BL Harbert. Has to be competitive bids by state law, right?

They do based on proposals and not low price, which is fine but you have the same two/three GC’s making bank all over campus.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bigbird said:

Snack bar sponsored by Little Debbie!

Feel better wing sponsored by Sinola Cartel 😂

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bigbird said:

Snack bar sponsored by Little Debbie!

Yeah, you know JABLMUTG (Just Auburn Being Like My Unsophisticated Thrifty Grandmother), the Snack Bar would have to be sponsored by Golden Flake  No SpaceX sky tram between football complex and stadium 😪

The "Dales Greater Montgomery Car Stero and Window Tinting Recording Studio." The Wetumpka Heating and Air player lounge. Com'on, this is a perfect opportunity to make Apple products ubiquitous through the department. Recruits would like some Tim Cook swag.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, lala said:

They do based on proposals and not low price, which is fine but you have the same two/three GC’s making bank all over campus.  

3 bids where each bid has the other 2 companies as subcontractors? That's the military industrial complex way as well as the good-ol-boy way! :)

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/29/2021 at 10:31 AM, AUBourne said:

Do they know they can object and ask for a better product for the money being spent or did they just lazily accept the vendors first proposal?  Have they looked at what other schools have in place? The Oregon facility was $68 million. There is no comparison between the two. 

https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2013/7/31/4574556/oregon-football-building-new

Well also OU was built at a much different time . The pandemic has created quite a mess in overall construction . It’s a much different time 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/29/2021 at 12:29 PM, TigerOne said:

It’s not just for the athletes.

do you think players care what Jordan Hare looks like?

tunnel vision is not a good look.

architecture should always be high priority. And as far as the furnishings will it really be on level with others or just barely catching up?

We weren't talking about JH. That's a different facility. And that's for ALL fans, not just players.

For a FOF, while I would love to have a eye opening front or facade. Auburn's history for building's regardless of his intended use seemed to need to fall into the overall look the Auburn U architectural designers wanted for all buildings built on campus. 

And knowing how much it was going to cost, they didn't want to pay millions more for a 'look'. If you look at the Arena, it falls into the same style and look...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...