FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[Whitecarrera]

I believe head to head results is the first tiebreaker. Last year, with a three way tie, no team was 2-0 in the H2H comparison. (Den > Wab, Wab > Witt, Witt > Den). The subsequent tiebreaker favored Denison.

This year, four teams could end 6-2 in NCAC, and with Witt v. OWU this week, there could be another three way tie, BUT Wabash has H2H wins against each of those teams.

[BashBacker#16]

I don't believe I have seen the rationale for a one-sided stadium, what exactly is it?

Like many others posts, I strongly oppose seats on one side.  It's a total game changer IMO.  Initially I thought there would be stands on both sides.  Is this confirmed and if so, why?

[Pat Coleman]

I keep seeing people talking about stands on one side, but my understanding, like that of 83LG, is that while there will be only one permanent grandstand, there will still be bleachers on the opposite side.

Further, my understanding is that Wabash will set up temporary stands on the visitor side during the season much like is done at other venues.  There is no desire to mix the streams, such as at  Witt.  The Monon Bell game already requires additional seating so we will simply be adding more stands than had been required in the past.

[sigma one]

Hey, BashBacker#16, good to know you are out there.  I have not seen the final renderings of the new stadium, so I can't be definitive about the one-side only seating.  From a couple of conversations, however, I have come to understand that all seating on the "home" side is a real possiiblity,  maybe with some temporary seating brought in for games.  As to the rationale, I don't know if one has been brought forward.  Perhaps they want to put all the money into a stadium with a press box and suites that eat up all the resources.  It is hard for me to imagine how the stadium will look without a permanent visitors' stands of whatever size.  I am not beyond holding out aesthetic hope . . . .
     I know that on campus there has been a concern expressed about the type of seating in the home stands.  Early plans called for a number (don't know how many, but I heard 250) "stadium" seats. The rest of the seats would be bench style.  The objection appeared to be that this would be preferential seating (maybe for those willing to pay more, maybe for persons somehow selected) that defies the Wabash tradition of mixing everyone together regardless of status or ability (willingness) to pony up more money.   I don't know how or if this has been resolved. 
     As I said in an earlier post, I'm sure whatever the College decides will look first class.  I, too, have a hard time imagining looking across the field to the back of the central campus.  Maybe there is a solution that makes the view acceptable or even quite nice with the addition of temporary stands.  Mixing the fan bases is an unfortunate future to contemplate.  I know a lot of stadiums are one-sided, and usually when I've attended games at these places the fans have gotten along fine with very few exceptions.  But it just has always seemed awkward from the viewing perspective.
     Oh, well, let's wait and see. My sense is that a permanent grandstand for visitors is a long shot.  Time marches on.     
     

[83 Little Giant]

IMHO, permanent visitor stands is the ultimate in wasted spend.  The cost per use of those seats would be astronomical given the few times that visiting teams fill those stands.   My hope is that the AD assesses the need for the number of visiting stands each season based on our schedule and then rents them accordingly.  Other than Monon Bell and the odd "big" game against Witt, those stands never have more than a hundred people in them (and they hold 1500).   If we end up adding a local college to our schedule (like Rose next year), the seating can easily be adjusted through one-time rentals.  Lots cheaper than taking up valuable real estate between the track and the chapel.

[Whitecarrera]

I agree that spending big $$$ on a new permanent visitor side would be tough to justify. Other than aesthetics, I'm not sure why the visitor side needs to come down. I'd say just leave it as it is for now.

[Li'l Giant]

I agree that spending big $$$ on a new permanent visitor side would be tough to justify. Other than aesthetics, I'm not sure why the visitor side needs to come down. I'd say just leave it as it is for now.

This was my thought as well. Those stands have none of the amenities we're worried about with the home stands. Why not just leave it? Even if it doesn't match, neither do temporary bleachers.

Edit: Unless it's a footprint issue. Will they need to use that space to move the track and field further towards the Chapel to fit the new home side? They're blocked on the Jennison side by the railroad tracks and on the other side by the Chapel. That might be the issue.

[sigma one]

I read or heard, maybe both, that the footprint of the new stadium will match the old footprint.  Moving the track and the football field sub-surfaces would result in substantial expense.  Years ago there was discussion with the railroad about their ceding the RR right a way to the College.  The train tracks that once were used as a spur to carry books from Donnelly's are no longer used.  Since the future grandstand structure will have about the same seating capacity as the current structure, there is probably space to build the new stadium without expanding  farther into the RR anyway (?).  It seems like a lot of the new structure will be "up" rather than "out."  The only part of the new stadium that might take more space is under the grandstand where the new Hall of [whatever] is planned, along with more restrooms and concessions.   We will have to wait for a good rendering before we will know.  I hope the College will release something sooner rather than later so that all this chatter, mine included, will be dampened.  Can we talk about the Bell Game?  Also OWU v. Witt has important implications.  The difference between 8-2 and 7-3 has NCAC ranking consequences for the Bishops, and when was the last time the Ohio Tigers were 6-4 (as they would be if they lose this week)?
 
Edit:  I will answer my own question.  Wittenberg was 6-4 in 2008.  They have not lost more than 2 games in a season since.  OWU was 9-1 (remember Espinosa?) in 2012.  Before that they were 7-3 in 2005, their best since 9-1 in 2001.  So, 7 wins would be good and 8 wins a big number for them.     

[Li'l Giant]

That's definitely a winnable game for OWU this week.

[CollegeGolf18]

From what I know there is going to be a slight change in direction, but not much. I have also heard that they want to redo the area on the other side of the visitor stands, including the armony. But that is something I heard two years ago while in school there. I'll have to ask around to figure some things out and report back.

[BayernFan]

Wasn't the field oriented more north/south, so that one end zone abutted the Armory, and the other Jennison?  I recall seeing old film of Wabash football games in the 40s where that seemed to be the case.

[Li'l Giant]

Wasn't the field oriented more north/south, so that one end zone abutted the Armory, and the other Jennison?  I recall seeing old film of Wabash football games in the 40s where that seemed to be the case.

I've seen film like this from Monon Memories but those were like int the 20s and 30s.

[Whitecarrera]

This might help.  With no Goodrich Hall yet, it is from the early 30's.


Also, I was there last weekend and told by a couple people that the footprint for the field and track would remain exactly the same. Unfortunately, I don't remember who told me that, or how reliable the source.

(edited for better pic link)

[wabndy]

I keep seeing people talking about stands on one side, but my understanding, like that of 83LG, is that while there will be only one permanent grandstand, there will still be bleachers on the opposite side.

Just received this rendering yesterday. Hadn't seen it before. Gives you a pretty clear idea of what the overall field will look like. I like the concept of opening up the stadium to the rest of campus. Having the large, permanent, and almost entirely unused visitors bleachers right behind the chapel did effectively cut the stadium off from the main part of campus.

I recall hearing when I was on campus for homecoming that the field and track footprint would be shifted just a yard or two away from Knowling Fieldhouse. That could have been in reference an earlier version of the plan or such a minor adjustment could still be considered within the same 'footprint' of what was there before.

[Li'l Giant]

I think that looks pretty good. If there are even metal temporary bleachers brought in for visitors I'm fine with it.