CPC better than Moody Center?

 I'm about to wade into a topic I don't normally get into, as at the base of it I think it is understood. Any UT Arlington fan will quickly say what a jewel College Park Center is. I know that I do get traffic outside of UTA circles who may not know, but this blog is not intended for them. When someone like WACHoopsNation visits UTA's home, they quickly see CPC for what it is, one of the best NCAA arenas.

While I don't see away games as often as I'd like, I go to a few here and there. I've seen several places when I was a student broadcaster traveling with the various teams. I seen more as an adult traveling to places as well. I rarely find the desire to write a post about opponent's venues, like Tarleton's Wisdom Gym is so far below CPC. I've made lists ranking arenas, like this one for current WAC venues, but that's the extent of it. 

The last time I made a post like this was early in CPC's infancy when I visited Rupp Arena in Kentucky. While CPC's capacity would likely mean it wouldn't be a good fit for the Wildcats, I was thinking the whole time about how CPC was cleaner, had better amenities or how cavernous it was. It was a pride point for me as a Maverick fan that our arena competed with the bluebloods.

And for the first time since that Kentucky trip, I'm going to do another. I got the inspiration after traveling to Austin to see the Mavs take on the UT-Austin Longhorns in their new building, Moody Center.

First, some basic information on the Longhorns building. They had called the Frank Erwin Center home since the late 1970's. It, like Rupp, was a huge building. It showed it's age, one of those 1970's monstrosities that had little curb appeal. It also was one of the round arenas that was awkward for a rectangular court. After Texas A&M built Reed Arena in the late 1990's, Erwin Center quickly showed it's age in Texas. I'm sure it didn't help that "little brother" had a better-quality arena either.

The Moody Center came about as a public-private partnership between the University and essentially a promoter-type group. They split the costs, UT-Austin owns the building, the U gets 60 days a year and the private group gets the rest of the calendar years to schedule concerts, shows and any other event. 

There are two bowls, the lower bowl seats 10,000. The upper bowl seats another 5,000. But the kicker, apparently some movable electronic video screens cover the upper deck during basketball games. I suspect it is done along the lines of UTA's College Park Center or Baylor's new arena, Foster Pavilion, in that a lower capacity makes for a better game day (and likely higher ticket prices for a school like UT-Austin).

Video boards covering the upper deck

My impression of the exterior was that I saw CPC-like elements. While the materials were the different, the sweeping overhead canopy over the steps up to the gate, the only major entry and lots of natural light with big open windows were present. There was an outdoor plaza were some fans were congregating before the game, similar to CPC as well. 

Moody Center from East 20th Street

Inside, I was amazed at how sterile it felt. One of the things I love about CPC is the constant nods to the Mavericks history. There's the UTA logo and name all over, photos of old Mavericks, the Hall of Honor and the list of UTA accolades on the main concourse. There is no question: CPC is a UT Arlington Maverick facility. The Dallas Wings play at UTA, unquestionably.

But Moody did not have that. Those that know me know how much I despise the Longhorn Athletic Department. They have the highest budget in the NCAA, play few true road games in non-conference in most sports and have the highest number of casual fans with no connection to the school. It was a relief to not see that logo and those colors all over the place. I saw a painted mural of Kevin Durant. That was the only permanent feature I saw. If I were a Longhorn fan, that would seem off to me. Heck, it does as a Longhorn detractor. 

The best way I could describe the concourse was it had a neutral feel. I went to Texas State versus UTA last year and that concourse gave me vibes of Dickie's Arena. Even the Longhorns apparel shop was essentially some portable racks in an open area containing Longhorn gear surrounded by rope-connected stantions.

As for the arena itself, it was a top notch, but definitely quiet. Dickie's Arena was a quiet facility too and I'm told that's because the design was done to give concert acoustics one of the best sounds available. Given the private interests in the Arena, I'd suspect that was the case here too. I don't remember if this existed at Dickie's, but Moody had curtains instead of walls in the entry to the arena from the concourse. That screams of a theater-type setup to minimize noise.

Playing court and seating, capacity approx 10,000

I think the student section was designed to mitigate that somewhat. Prior to this visit, the only student section I was aware of that was at center court was Grand Canyon. UT-Austin still has students on the opponents end in the second half, but instead of just occupying that baseline, it stretches behind the bench and runs most of the sideline to behind home bench. It also was several rows deep. I was texting a couple of friends who went to the school and they praised current AD Chris del Conte. Their impression was he was less about money and more about the experience. At least in that case, they appear right. I'd like to think that's accurate.

As mentioned, the (I'm assuming) movable video boards covering the upper deck were a fancy touch. They had duplicates of the center hung scoreboard, basic team stats and the logo of the teams involved. It certainly created a better feel than curtains down at CPC. 

I also couldn't believe the seats were not in any color scene for the Longhorns. They were a dark gray or light black color. There was a small Longhorn logo in the middle, but if a seat is on TV, say  a background shot for a pre-game show, that logo will not be visible. That also gave me Dickie's Arena vibes.

In the end, the  game day atmosphere was tame, except for two instances. The T-shirt guy came out and his energy and the crowd's desire for a T-shirt were the only time the Arena felt gameday loud to me. There was also a media timeout deal where the lights dimmed, people turned on the lights of their phones and the arena played AC/DC. That was a pretty unique experience.

Thuderstruck, dimmed lighting and cell phones

I'm also thankful for UTA for one other factor. While it's not related to the building's design or aesthetics, it is directly related to the situation. I went down there with family. A total of six were in tow. In order to by tickets, we had to go to a third-party site. The predominant option was pairs, but occasionally there were four. We ended up buy three pairs in one row, but the seats were not contiguous. It also meant we had to pays Seat Geek fees three times.

When we got to the game, we initially sat in our seats until the start of the game. When no one else was in the row, we moved back together. 

After the game, I checked the box score, it was listed as a sellout. As you can see from the picture of the arena interior, there were more empty seats than occupied ones. It is a common NCAA practice for some schools that attendance is reported by tickets sold and not tickets scanned. That clearly was the case for UT Austin, despite staff at the gate entry scanning tickets for entry. In order for 5,000 plus tickets to have been counted in attendance, and every seat available on a third-party site. UT-Austin had to have sold all the tickets prior. While I don't fault them for that, it make ticket purchasing a headache.

As a whole, I don't really care how attendance is counted. But in this case, it made attending a Moody Center game a greater hassle and I don't fault the U for getting that revenue, if they are concerned with game day experiences, that has to be addressed. CPC's ticket purchasing experience, while not perfect and occasionally has glitched for me, is far superior. I never left a CPC event thinking about ticket acquisition.

Now, I don't want this to sound like I'm down on the place. This is clearly an upgrade over the Frank Erwin Center. In fact, their old venue was way behind what they do for most other sports.

But CPC is clearly a better place for sports. The exteriors are similar, but that is it. UTA's concourse is what a college sports facility should be like. The restrooms are clean rarely crowded. The concessions tend to move fast. UTA's 2,000 plus for Oral Roberts sounded far louder than UT-Austin's 4,000 plus. The intimate layout is good for UTA's uses. Maybe when Kansas or, in the future, Texas A&M, comes to town, the Center is louder, but for everyday game uses, especially the cupcake non-conference schedule they play, I'm sure the tempered atmosphere is the norm more than it is the exception.

CPC's size likely would not translate well to UT Austin, though the Texas crowd I saw would not have exceeded CPC's capacity. In a manner similar to Rupp at Kentucky, while it is perfect for UTA but may not be good for the Longhorns. But that doesn't mitigate the fact that amenity-to-amenity, CPC is a better facility in my opinion.