wawwhite said:

---

SFAJack_76 said:

---

It is expected that RFQ's to architects will go out in March. Probably, an architect gets selected in three months plus or minus.

---

I'm interested in hearing others' thoughts on how the new football facility should be designed. Should it lean toward a modern aesthetic, incorporate timberrelated elements, or strike a balance between the two? Another important consideration is seating capacity. Not too big or too small.

In my opinion, if columnlike structures are included, they could be designed to resemble pine tree trunks to reinforce a natural, regional identity. It might also be meaningful to incorporate a tribute to Bum Phillips in some way. That one is a tad bit nostalgic and selfish on my part.

Ultimately, the goal should be to create an experience that leaves guests wishing they had something just like it at their own schools.

---

The rendering from the masterplan are optimum imho. Gets us closer to the action and maximizes the fan experience. The estimated seating of 11,000 is perfect. If things get rolling it's easy to expand.

The current plan is for seating of about 11,000. I think that perfect. We don't need a half empty 16,000 seat stadium. With an 11,000 seat stadium we can probably sell some seats instead of giving 1/3 of them away.

I was just thinking what it might be further down the road, with UT wanting to bring SFA to a whole new level in the next 10 years, if growth continues, already almost 3,000 students (31% increase) and with the cap at Texas A&M at 78,000 students, SFA becomes the alternative to Texas A&M, and enrollment could triple in the next decade.

SFA is likely targeting a total enrollment of 15,000 to 18,000 students by 2035, with a cap at some point after that not wanting to go too high, to keep that small school feel.

But I get it.

SFAXE93 said:

---

I was just thinking what it might be further down the road, with UT wanting to bring SFA to a whole new level in the next 10 years, if growth continues, already almost 3,000 students (31% increase) and with the cap at Texas A&M at 78,000 students, SFA becomes the alternative to Texas A&M, and enrollment could triple in the next decade.

SFA is likely targeting a total enrollment of 15,000 to 18,000 students by 2035, with a cap at some point after that not wanting to go too high, to keep that small school feel.

But I get it.

---

I would rather see us tighten entrance requirements and become more competitive (in demand) than chasing enrollment gains If we could get to 15,000/16,000 and make the university a smaller alternative to the more competitive public universities, I think we would thrive.

BigJack85 said:

---

wawwhite said:

---

SFAJack_76 said:

---

It is expected that RFQ's to architects will go out in March. Probably, an architect gets selected in three months plus or minus.

---

I'm interested in hearing others' thoughts on how the new football facility should be designed. Should it lean toward a modern aesthetic, incorporate timberrelated elements, or strike a balance between the two? Another important consideration is seating capacity. Not too big or too small.

In my opinion, if columnlike structures are included, they could be designed to resemble pine tree trunks to reinforce a natural, regional identity. It might also be meaningful to incorporate a tribute to Bum Phillips in some way. That one is a tad bit nostalgic and selfish on my part.

Ultimately, the goal should be to create an experience that leaves guests wishing they had something just like it at their own schools.

---

The rendering from the masterplan are optimum imho. Gets us closer to the action and maximizes the fan experience. The estimated seating of 11,000 is perfect. If things get rolling it's easy to expand.

---

Easy to expand is the thing people don't quite get. With the current renderings, it's not unrealistic to add up to another 10k seats relatively easily and cheap. Adding more decks and completing the bowl would be easy.

Obviously as of right now and the immediate future, 11-12k is absolutely perfect. But as enrollment increases and IF SFA makes the FBS jump, there will definitively need to be expansion. If we had 15-18k students AND we host at least a couple of exciting FBS opponents, we will draw massive crowds to Nac.

That's also assuming we can keep the football success going.

We just had one successful season in a decade of FCS play (or essentially 3 good seasons in 40 years) and we're still thinking of a future FBS spot? I like that kind of optimism, but the next 10 years of growth will have to be off the charts for the college and the city for us to even sniff raising our sports level. Of course, I don't believe there will even be a FBS to go to in 10 years, so maybe I'm not the right one to make predictions.

nacluth said:

---

We just had one successful season in a decade of FCS play (or essentially 3 good seasons in 40 years) and we're still thinking of a future FBS spot? I like that kind of optimism, but the next 10 years of growth will have to be off the charts for the college and the city for us to even sniff raising our sports level. Of course, I don't believe there will even be a FBS to go to in 10 years, so maybe I'm not the right one to make predictions.

---

I'll start off by saying SFA is not ready for the FBS, not from a success standpoint but that we still need to build a stable infrastructure. However I do see it happening within the next 10 years.

Right now SFA is in a very unique and fortunate situation. SFA has essentially become the UT system's most valuable asset. SFA is basically their secret middle finger to A&M, and they're trying to build SFA up to be a real competitor as an agriculture school to the Aggie's. A cheaper and smaller alternative for students who maybe don't want to spend an arm and a leg or don't want to be in such a crowded program.

We have essentially become the UT system's golden child. Anything SFA needs or wants to be successful, the UT system is going to provide or give SFA the means to get it. Athletic growth is essentially correlated to overall growth in a university, and they're gonna want to help SFA achieve heights never dreamed of.

I think the UT system has a roadmap for SFA, and the Southland is not on that map. I could see them doing everything they can to try and get SFA into an FBS conference as soon as SFA is ready, or ready in their eyes, and it wouldn't surprise me if they helped financially anyway they could.

I believe making a new stadium that can very easily be expanded very quickly was done intentionally with that thought process in mind. The overall improvements that the university will be getting are being done to grow the SFA brand, make SFA grow at an astronomical rate, and I think it's being done intentionally to make SFA THE agriculture school for UT.

Also worth noting that past success has little to do with FCS teams getting invites to the FBS. Look at some of the schools that have moved up recently. Some had a lot of FCS success and some make you wonder how they go called up at all.

There are a lot of factors when a conference decides if you're a good fit for not. If success was the biggest factor though NDSU would've been called up a decade ago.

...not to mention already the best forestry school in the state!

I may be thinking a little too lofty, but I feel the UT system should add Veterinary Medicine to SFA.

Things are starting to move broadly in Nacogdoches. We have had some movement in our local elected positions and seen some revitalization of our downtown since COVID.

I was born here is 1978 when the population was 28,000. After being away for a few years, we moved back in 1988 (population 30,500). A significant growth in 10 years. Now almost 40 years later, the population is 32,500.

Nacogdoches, similar to most of deep east Texas, has been stagnant in population growth, wage growth, and political influence.

I say this because the UT plan for SFA can only be a positive. The city is in desperate need of funding overall. Growing the university population and student experience can only help.

However, there has long been an us and them mentality between the campus and the town. While sporting events have been the one major collaboration between the two, there has been very little cooperative planning and very little cross-funding. This has had serious long term effects on both entities.

Small town schools have to recognize the need for input from their host city and have mutual engagement for their long term planning. I hope this has taken place on some level, but I have yet to hear about it through city channels.

In 10 years, SFA may be a sparkling city in and of itself inside Nacogdoches, but it's a fools hope to think one can grow without the other. UT may have some grand plans for SFA, but if Nacogdoches doesn't grow alongside it in the next decade, they will double think adding more money into a backwater town.

Just an observation/mini-rant about history, but the only comparable FBS town as small as Nacogdoches is Boone, NC (App State). They have been able to make the transition reasonably well, but there is also a lot more money there than in our very poor town.

I hope that the UT optimization provides growth for all.