Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Texas A&M indoor facility the best?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New Texas A&M indoor facility the best?

    Is this the best indoor facility in the nation? It looks beautiful in pictures. The sightlines look good too for spectators. Also like that it's not banked.

  • #2
    I had not been aware of that. I'm a bit surprised that the NCAA would have its indoor championships on an unbanked track. The marks in certain events will not be as good as they would have been on a banked track like the one in Fayetteville. I have no problem with that--it's the competition that counts not the marks.

    Comment


    • #3
      It's banked.

      Comment


      • #4
        Is the steepness of the banking adjustable? Just wondering, since the photos I saw made the banking not look terribly steep (or at least as the sprinter-friendly Tyson track). I'd guess we won't see as many fast 200 and 400 times this year at NCAA Indoors, if that's the case.

        Comment


        • #5
          Sorry, it actually is banked. From the pictures I'd seen, it didn't appear so. But I found this gallery at the website below with better pictures:

          Click on "Gallery":

          http://www.aggieathletics.com/sports/c- ... 08aaa.html

          At this site:

          http://www.aggieathletics.com/

          ...are pics of A&M vs Tennessee and Texas. Go to the Multimedia menu and then click on Photo Album and then on the icon for the meet pics.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by dl
            Is the steepness of the banking adjustable? Just wondering, since the photos I saw made the banking not look terribly steep (or at least as the sprinter-friendly Tyson track). I'd guess we won't see as many fast 200 and 400 times this year at NCAA Indoors, if that's the case.
            Funny you say that. In this video, the bankings appear to be adjustable.

            http://thecowtownmarathon.ning.com/vide ... deo%3A3150

            Comment


            • #7
              So, why does A&M need an indoor track? They are in a very moderate climate. I suspect this is the result of $140/barrel oil and typical Aggie boosters/alumni(former students to use the proper term).

              Comment


              • #8
                My first reaction on seeing photos over the weekend was that it seems somewhat a fan-unfriendly venue, what with the stands being on one side, and that side being pushed back from the track by the sprint straight being outside the oval.

                No worse than an outdoor place, to be sure, but one of the great plusses of indoor track is being right on top of the action, and for everything but the sprints, looks like the fan is rather far removed.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Dave
                  So, why does A&M need an indoor track? They are in a very moderate climate. I suspect this is the result of $140/barrel oil and typical Aggie boosters/alumni(former students to use the proper term).
                  Indoor track is a countable NCAA sport.

                  The question is why more schools have not stepped up to provide facilities. Is it possible (shocking!) that schools are cynically exploiting T&F athletes to count as many times as possible with as little investment as possible?

                  That couldn't be right...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Dave
                    So, why does A&M need an indoor track? They are in a very moderate climate. I suspect this is the result of $140/barrel oil and typical Aggie boosters/alumni(former students to use the proper term).
                    Similarly, why does A&M need an indoor basketball arena?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by gm
                      Originally posted by Dave
                      So, why does A&M need an indoor track? They are in a very moderate climate. I suspect this is the result of $140/barrel oil and typical Aggie boosters/alumni(former students to use the proper term).
                      Indoor track is a countable NCAA sport.

                      The question is why more schools have not stepped up to provide facilities. Is it possible (shocking!) that schools are cynically exploiting T&F athletes to count as many times as possible with as little investment as possible?

                      That couldn't be right...
                      Oh god, not the "NCAA non-revenue athletes are being exploited" thing again. While I think it's great that TAMU built this facility, the reason "more schools have not stepped up" is that it's a tremendous cost, and schools with the budget of TAMU are few and far between.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I stand by my statement. If indoor and outdoor were not separate countable sports, there would be virtually no indoor facilities.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          That's fine. I just think the idea that many non-revenue student athletes are being exploited is a bit much.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Non-revenue student-athletes are exploited in a huge way. They are the ones who bear the burden of being students while the revenue sport participants get to be athletes. In order to qualify for NCAA basketball tournement money, Division I universities must sponsor 14 sports. Track and Field and Cross Country count for 6 of them. That means that we should be entitled to 6/14 of the revenues brought in by everyone else. How many schools actually give that to their track programs? And how do you justify the fact that they don't as anything other than exploitation?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              That's one fairly entitled way of looking at it. Another would be that without the NCAA tournament money, way more programs would cease to exist. Thank God for that 14 sport requirement.

                              I got more out of competing for my alma mater than I could ever hope to repay, and I would consider my career as fairly hit-or-miss.

                              I guess I just don't get when and how non-revenue sport athletes (and their coaches) started looking at what they do as a job for which they should receive something other than the incredible opportunity to be a part of a team, free coaching, training facilities, etc., and in some cases, a reduced or free cost of education.

                              Here's a letter to the editor I wrote to the NY Times on this subject about a year ago:

                              http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... A96E9C8B63

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X