This summer has been the hardest to come up with content. Like last summer, I'm working on stuff that, also like last summer, hasn't panned out yet. It may not, or it may come a little later than I want, but the main point is that I think there have been fewer posts this summer than usual.
However, I was thinking about a conversation I had on Twitter, or X, with another Mav fan about the state of Maverick Stadium from a several years ago. With the advent of a new sport coming to the venue, I was rethinking about that exchange. Specifically, what would Maverick Stadium need in terms of an upgrade or renovation.
While the pace has slowed, the have been renovations or new facilities in the last two decades that have completely changed the presentation of UT Arlington athletics from when I was a student. With that in mind, I thought about ranking the facilities on campus. Obviously, an apples-to-apples comparison is difficult, but using a base theme, like player amenities, curb appeal, fan comfort, location and overall function. the ranking can be standardized a bit.
With that framework set, here's my ranking of all Maverick athletic facilities:
6) The Gilstrap Center - While this is on the ground of Maverick Stadium, it really functions as a stand-alone building. Built after Maverick Stadium was completed, even after the disbandment of the football team, it served as home for the athletic department's administration until College Park Center was built. After an interior renovation, the golf teams moved in. There are sport-specific items inside for player development that are more cutting edge in nature. However, the Texas Rangers Golf Course is the home course for the program and the team doesn't play out if the Gilstrap Center. Based on that technicality, it starts the list in last place.
5) The UTA Tennis Center - Admittedly, this is the venue I know the least about. However, it is also the one that is the smallest (where the team actually plays). The ten-court venue doesn't have a lot of places for fans to sit and what it does have is essentially small, portable aluminum bleachers. That is likely due to the smaller fan quantity who do visit home contests. But compared to places like SMU or Baylor that I have visited, it certainly lacks in that regard. Curb appeal consists of a chain link fence with a fancy polyester wrap. I hear good things about the pro shop but haven't been there. The footprint is smaller, but the pictures on UTAMavs.com of it look good. It certainly would follow in the pattern of the last decade and a half of providing for the athletes first. It just wasn't enough to overcome the other portions to move higher on the list.
4) Maverick Stadium - Two through four were the most difficult for me as each have something to offer over the other. Ultimately, what caused Maverick Stadium to finish below the other two was the fact that there hasn't been anything major done to largest athletic complex on campus since its opening in 1980. Unlike most of the others on this list that are sport specific, it is home to the most sports of any venue - indoor and outdoor track and field along with cross country for both genders. That number grows to seven next year when women's flag football comes to campus. The concourse still has the basic amenities for fans, which meet basic expectations in that regard. The chairback seats, number almost 2,000 of the 12,000 possible seats, are a little sun-washed. The turf, track and field venues have been regularly maintained over the years, meaning the Mav is still a quality track and field stadium. In fact, it is a semi-final site prior to the Texas High school track playoffs and has hosted a conference title meet ten times in its 45-year history.
I have linked this blog post many times, but there are things Maverick Stadium could do to improve. There is just not a need to do so at the moment. Athlete amenities are below the three venues coming up, but there have been minor improvements in the last decade and a half. Maverick Stadium was a top-level stadium when it was built and though other places have surpassed it, the things athletes need today are covered. The pizazz factor is not though.
2) Clay Gould Ballpark - It is near a virtual tie between the baseball and soft ball venues. Both built state-of-the-art clubhouses at the same time. Both have had major exterior improvements in the last quarter century. Both have made field enhancements. Both have similar seating options with chairbacks in the center and bleacher on the edges. Clay Gould has slightly larger concessions and restrooms, though that is marginal. Clay Gould's pressbox is a bit more impressive that Allan Saxe's, which is essentially a room on stilts. The real advantage is Clay Gould has a canopy over the center section, though quite of bit of other collegiate baseball facilities have larger ones. I have been severely sunburned on the legs after a softball game, but leapfrogged seats during baseball games to follow the shade the canopy provides. The Mocek patio at Clay Gould allows for large group picnic gatherings. I'm not sure if the softball venue would have demand for one, but it certainly is an amenity available only for baseball.
Both venues could benefit from a teardown and new build of the center sections. The clubhouses really give freedom to the rebuild. Larger places at schools like Baylor or Rice have those under the stands. Both could also be upgraded with better pressboxes. But there really isn't much more I see that could vault them significantly higher than where they are now. The steps they've take since leaving the Southland has been quite large.
1) College Park Center - I don't think anyone reading this, and I mean absolutely zero percent, would disagree. CPC is head and shoulders above everything else. That is not a knock on the other venues, but a testament to how valuable CPC is. State-of-the-art presentation, graphics and sound give fans a professional presentation. That is one reason why the Dallas Wings have called it home. They are moving to the older auditorium at the Dallas Convention Center for a larger capacity. Otherwise, CPC is superior in every way. The locker rooms are modern and no other venue have anything else that is terribly superior. The administration space is modern. Athletic support, development and academic support are second to none. The building looks great. Unlike two through four, it is integrated into the campus very well. I could keep going but CPC is no secret. In doing so, it earned the top spot as the best UTA athletic facility.
No comments:
Post a Comment