What to Improve?

I've been hanging on to this the idea of this entry (and this one too) since February when the Shorthorn, UT Arlington's student newspaper, reported on Athletic Director Jim Baker's impending retirement. I added my own commentary a bit later. The link can be found here.

There's a couple of paragraphs at the end of the article that caught my eye that I believe will very much will have an impact on the future of the Athletic Department. And seeing how we've entered the summer months, now is the time to pontificate.

"UTA Athletics has been pursuing an athletics master plan that will address current and long-term needs, improvements and facility expansion for most Division I teams. It will also help revitalize the west side of campus."

There are possibly two things that are being addressed here, though the obvious is "facility expansion." So based on that quote, I want to go down the list of current facilities and give my opinion on what upgrades are best or needed for each facility. The list is in order starting with the least needed facility for upgrades and ending with the venue that needs the most attention.

1) College Park Center - As home for the two basketball teams and women's volleyball squad. It was state of the art when it opened in 2012 and is still in a class of its own. The article also mentioned the west side of campus, so this clearly isn't a high priority on the list one way or another. Basic attention to detail, such as when equipment wears out or becomes obsolete is really all that is needed.

2) Maverick Stadium - A big asterisk goes with this one, as the list is technically for current sports, but as this tandem post indicates, would need an upgrade with any potential new sport. As it is, the locker rooms have been upgraded within the last 15 years and Maverick Stadium is still a fine track and field venue. All the track (and technically golf too) teams would need is amenity upgrades and replacements, such as weight room, training room, academic centers, offices, etc.

Speaking of golf, the Nancy Baker clubhouse is on par with locker rooms of College Park Center or the two diamond sports. It was the home of the Athletic Department but became available when CPC opened. It morphed into the golf clubhouse and was renovated into something pretty nice in 2017.

3) UTA Tennis Center - This is probably the biggest unknown for me. There isn't much on the internet and I never toured it when I was a student broadcaster. The tour wouldn't matter anyway as UTAMavs.com says a locker room was constructed in 2020, which was something I've been saying needed to be done for a while, (if you look under the second point of this older entry, there will be a reference to that). Each facility needs its own place to for the student athletes to locker and attend to their specific sport-related matters. The UTA Tennis Center has at least started that.

4) Alan Saxe Field - There's a lot of similarities between the Saxe and Clay Gould Ballpark. The strengths of one are mirrored in the strengths of the other. There are two major differences, however. The grandstands for the softball venue were rebuilt in 2015, along with the press box. So what really lacks here?

Simple fact of no awning. I've been sun-burned more at this facility than any other UTA venue...combined. I'd expect College Park Center to be low on the list, and Maverick Stadium doesn't have its premier sport of football to attend, but still, the list isn't close. Unlike it's baseball counterpart, the layout is perfect for afternoon and evening games if there was some form of shade, as the sun sets behind the press box.

View of the Alan Saxe Field grandstands. There is ample and easy space to add an awning.

The lack of an awning transitions to the attached structure, the press box. While it was rebuilt with the grandstands, it still is small and not ready for a large-scale game (see NCAA tournament or national broadcast). An expansion would serve that function. As it is, it serves the general game-to-game schedule okay for UTA.

5) Clay Gould Ballpark - Clay Gould's player amenities have advanced tremendously in the last decade or so. However, fan, press and other professional-related amenities haven't. The grandstands are a bit cramped, the awning doesn't stretch very far, the concession stand is small, there isn't much space on the concourse for the concession line-especially in a big game-and the press box is outdated and "cozy."

The quaint concession stand needs at least a partner to relieve the load.

UTA took a huge step forward for fans with the Mocek Patio, an outdoor picnic area on the third base line. There are more improvements in the planning phases, but as is, the outdoor picnic area gives fans a different way to enjoy a Mav game.

There is lots of room between the exterior wall and the press box.

With the Justin Wilson indoor practice facility and player clubhouse, much of the player-amenity infrastructure is in place. That makes a complete tear-down and rebuild of the stadium, a la Baylor Ballpark in Waco, highly inefficient. The metal bleachers added on each side of the grandstands during the renovation at the beginning of the century were crucial in increasing capacity. However, it certainly looks piecemeal.

There is plenty of grandstand expansion space on the 3rd base side...

The one real way to solve all of the Clay Gould deficiencies listed above involves a tear down of the grandstands and press box, along with a removal of the metal bleachers and a complete rebuild. If the restrooms need replacing, relocation or rebuild, that certainly can be accomplished easily within the context of a new grandstand. I'd suggest one main structure that stretches from first to third base and extends higher beyond the current bleachers. That increases both capacity and space within the seating area, while not detracting from what is there in the concourse. A new state of the art press box, plus the edition of a two or three suites could fit along the top stretching around the new grandstands.

...as well as the first base grandstands.

Finally, a better awning that stretches further out towards the field and covers more of the stands on the baseline is a must. It isn't uncommon to see fans moving seats to follow the small amount of shade throughout an afternoon game. Even evening game suffer from this problem at the beginning of the game. I suspect adding a better awning would have a positive impact on attendance, even if to a small degree. Even if nothing else were to change, the impact to the Gould of better awning coverage would be huge, more than any other change.

University of Louisiana play-by-play broadcaster Jay Walker ranked the Sun Belt ballparks and put Clay Gould Ballpark at number 9. His analysis is spot on from the fan perspective, but completely misses the mark on player amenities. That alone moves CGB up a few spots on that list.