ADVERTISEMENT

Walsh & more

Space is the problem. Our competitors (i.e. Providence) are building stand alone facilities that are 58,000+ sqft. That’s the size of the Richie regan athletic center. How do you compete with that?

That’s a little misleading because it includes the actual rec center, Alumni Hall and student center, which are all connected to each other at PC. But to make their practice facility a part of that complex of buildings, they were also able to buy an actual street from the city and several homes in order to expand out the footprint. That’s something which obviously could never happen here, and shows what SHU is dealing with from a space perspective.
 
point taken - I have never been to the ruane center so cannot say with certainty, but if you read the press releases it doesn’t appear those other amenities are included in the sqft calculation. Regardless, you can replace PC with another school if you like. My point is that even if George Kurtz was a diehard hoops junkie land issues prevent us from building facilities comparable to our competition (in terms of size).
 
Last edited:
Give us the details and ask us to write checks! I’m sure everyone will step up. This is something we know we need and we certainly want! With no details, other than being told “they’re working on it” many here, including myself, have already sent in donations earmarked for this project.
Agreed and drawings and details will be widely shared.
 
Like I said, I get it and I understand there are professionals that know what they are doing. However, the average schmuck like me is still going to get frustrated when you constantly are told that every dollar makes a difference, when in reality, the people asking don't even believe that as evident by how these campaigns go.
It does make a difference! It helps build alumni giving rates when Average Joe chips in $50, and when enough people do that, it does add up. It also helps Development build data about where people are directing their dollars. It just doesn't move the needle on major capital projects. Like I said, that's all calculated well in advance. But there is a role for everyone to play, big or small.
 
That said, there are times when institutions are still shy about making the big ask (though less and less as time goes by and the stakes are raised).

Thirty years ago, when Glassboro State was cultivating Henry Rowan for a naming gift to establish a college of engineering, they did all their homework and wooed Henry and Betty Rowan for years before they felt the time was right to make the ask. After discussion the ways their aspirations aligned with Rowan's vision, they told him they thought he had the capability to donate $10 million.

Henry was a little taken aback at the number, but only because he and his wife had been expecting to be solicited for a greater figure. They were thinking more like $100 million, which, of course, their gift wound up being.

The Rowans weren't offended, but oftentimes, donors are when the school asks too little of them - as if their wealth, beneficence, and ability to give are being underestimated. The convention in development is to ask more than you think the donor can give. They might not actually give that amount, but they are often flattered to think the school thought they could. But if you ask too much, it looks like you don't know your business and it begins to look unprofessional. In the Rowan case, it was kind of a happy accident.
 
That said, there are times when institutions are still shy about making the big ask (though less and less as time goes by and the stakes are raised).

Thirty years ago, when Glassboro State was cultivating Henry Rowan for a naming gift to establish a college of engineering, they did all their homework and wooed Henry and Betty Rowan for years before they felt the time was right to make the ask. After discussion the ways their aspirations aligned with Rowan's vision, they told him they thought he had the capability to donate $10 million.

Henry was a little taken aback at the number, but only because he and his wife had been expecting to be solicited for a greater figure. They were thinking more like $100 million, which, of course, their gift wound up being.

The Rowans weren't offended, but oftentimes, donors are when the school asks too little of them - as if their wealth, beneficence, and ability to give are being underestimated. The convention in development is to ask more than you think the donor can give. They might not actually give that amount, but they are often flattered to think the school thought they could. But if you ask too much, it looks like you don't know your business and it begins to look unprofessional. In the Rowan case, it was kind of a happy accident.
The biggest point you made there was that they cultivated the relationship over years. Based on my limited observations on this board, it sounds like the leadership at the Hall has been doing just this for many years, and now is the time to hopefully have this hard work payoff.
 
I believe it has something to do with those particular walls and load bearing on the structure… possible to remove, but it would drastically increase cost. Removing the stage would also mean one less flexible space for larger functions.
Personally, I'm glad they kept the stage. I know this is an unpopular view.
 
Last edited:
small detail but i really like the look of the new banners in the rafters. Much cleaner look. Also, thank goodness they took down the individual "NIT" banners - cringeworthy and reeked of small time.
 
small detail but i really like the look of the new banners in the rafters. Much cleaner look. Also, thank goodness they took down the individual "NIT" banners - cringeworthy and reeked of small time.
unfortunate because a lot of those were suring the time where the NIT was the top cheese
 
  • Like
Reactions: SHUSource
FAAdXaKXMAAwVYn
 
That said, there are times when institutions are still shy about making the big ask (though less and less as time goes by and the stakes are raised).

Thirty years ago, when Glassboro State was cultivating Henry Rowan for a naming gift to establish a college of engineering, they did all their homework and wooed Henry and Betty Rowan for years before they felt the time was right to make the ask. After discussion the ways their aspirations aligned with Rowan's vision, they told him they thought he had the capability to donate $10 million.

Henry was a little taken aback at the number, but only because he and his wife had been expecting to be solicited for a greater figure. They were thinking more like $100 million, which, of course, their gift wound up being.

The Rowans weren't offended, but oftentimes, donors are when the school asks too little of them - as if their wealth, beneficence, and ability to give are being underestimated. The convention in development is to ask more than you think the donor can give. They might not actually give that amount, but they are often flattered to think the school thought they could. But if you ask too much, it looks like you don't know your business and it begins to look unprofessional. In the Rowan case, it was kind of a happy accident.
That is very true. People with means want you to treat them that way. There flattered…and those with big hearts want to give a good chunk of it away.
And it does take years to cultivate a relationship to get a gift of that magnitude.
Plant the seeds now…water…nurture…and maybe 5…maybe 10 years down the road, you end up with a legacy worthy gift.
 
I think the update looks nice, looking forward to seeing it in person soon. One thing I found pretty disappointing, and I’m surprised nobody but Carino pointed it out is losing 300 seats of capacity. As small as the place is that’s a lot of seats to lose ( on a percentage basis) for a $6M upgrade.
 
It’s a shame they decided on that 3,200 seat capacity in the 1940s. If you look at the building from the outside, pre rec-center, it’s not small. But it contained a lot of other stuff in the basement and in the back, which is probably why there’s a lot of structural support around the stage. It was more than just a basketball gym when they built the thing, which in retrospect is too bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: silkcitypirate
small detail but i really like the look of the new banners in the rafters. Much cleaner look. Also, thank goodness they took down the individual "NIT" banners - cringeworthy and reeked of small time.

Can we please put replicas of these banners in Prudential Center? That’s always burned me that all we got was the FF banner we brought with us from the Meadowlands (not even a new one!) and more recently one banner for all the retired numbers. I’m not sure if we just haven’t asked to do it or there’s some dumb reason the Devils won’t let us do that. There’s plenty of space (the Devils certainly aren’t adding to it anytime soon) so I don’t understand why that is.


I think the update looks nice, looking forward to seeing it in person soon. One thing I found pretty disappointing, and I’m surprised nobody but Carino pointed it out is losing 300 seats of capacity. As small as the place is that’s a lot of seats to lose ( on a percentage basis) for a $6M upgrade.

We’ve already lost a good chunk of that capacity due to not pulling the old bleachers out as far due to needing more space for media/safety or they were just broken and couldn’t make it out as far. Even after they built the offices, When I was a student 15 years ago Walsh was listed as 2200 capacity, but more recently it was already down to like 1500-1800. I believe McDonaugh at GU is around the same 1200 or so, about the same maybe 1500 or so at Alumni Hall at PC. If Tony likes it and we don’t sell out WBB games regularly anyway aside from UConn what difference does it make? What’s done is done, I’m still amazed that due to construction inflation this minor facelift cost $6m.
 
I’m still amazed that due to construction inflation this minor facelift cost $6m.
Unfortunately, there has been hyper inflation in the non-residentional construction market the past 10 years. Avg of 4.5% per year - with some years over 5.5%....ive been posting this on the trove every chance i had for the past year. People are probably sick of hearing it. LOL
 
  • Like
Reactions: thehall07
Those questioning the cost of $6M

Wooden seats replaced in balcony by fiberglass-style seats with chair backs
New carpeting in the balcony
Bench seats replaced on lower level by fiberglass-style seats with chair backs
New court floor and underfloor
New sound system and speakers
Hanging LED scoreboard
2 flat-screen video boards
Sharp new blue-and-white banners
Baskets on each baseline now lower automatically from the ceiling
New control room for the video board
New signage throughout


This took from late April to September.

The cost is reasonable.
 
Those questioning the cost of $6M

Wooden seats replaced in balcony by fiberglass-style seats with chair backs
New carpeting in the balcony
Bench seats replaced on lower level by fiberglass-style seats with chair backs
New court floor and underfloor
New sound system and speakers
Hanging LED scoreboard
2 flat-screen video boards
Sharp new blue-and-white banners
Baskets on each baseline now lower automatically from the ceiling
New control room for the video board
New signage throughout


This took from late April to September.

The cost is reasonable.
And the labor is outrageous on top of that. It's outrageously expensive to do anything today.

My post was not meant to imply this doesn't cost $6M - rather that this project (and others) is significantly more expensive in 2021 than it would have been 3, 5, or 7 years ago.
 
Last edited:
Those questioning the cost of $6M

Wooden seats replaced in balcony by fiberglass-style seats with chair backs
New carpeting in the balcony
Bench seats replaced on lower level by fiberglass-style seats with chair backs
New court floor and underfloor
New sound system and speakers
Hanging LED scoreboard
2 flat-screen video boards
Sharp new blue-and-white banners
Baskets on each baseline now lower automatically from the ceiling
New control room for the video board
New signage throughout


This took from late April to September.

The cost is reasonable.
Money well spent and long overdue!
 
  • Like
Reactions: TrueBlue1989
What is not specified beside just listing it is the cost of the underbelly of the court. The work and cost was extensive. But you don't see it as it lays beneath the court.

If people complain about bang for the buck they simply don't understand the undertaking.
 
What is not specified beside just listing it is the cost of the underbelly of the court. The work and cost was extensive. But you don't see it as it lays beneath the court.

If people complain about bang for the buck they simply don't understand the undertaking.
what does the underbelly consist of? its not just a floor?
 
There’s a lot of of padding underneath. A high-quality floor has a certain amount of bounce to it because of what’s underneath it.
what about floors like prudential that have ice under it? guess they put the padding underneath
 
Also, a lot of concreate as the base. Lots of work to ensure it's level. Then the padding and then the court.

I spoke to Tony Bozzella and he told me that the whole project is as good as any court in the country and no expense was spared.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TrueBlue1989
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT