Started By
Message
Should Mizzou remove Rock M?
Posted on 10/29/13 at 9:51 am
Posted on 10/29/13 at 9:51 am
I love how Mizzou values traditions, and Rock M is definitely a well-known landmark in college football, but is it time to go? At least, most of it?
This is a good story about how the North End Zone is cursed -- LINK -- so should we mix it up?
I was at the game on Saturday, and I will say that the hill just looks sloppy. It reminds me of my high school games, people sitting on the hill against the fence outside the endzone. It looks great for low-attendance games, where it is open and clean, but looks bad for sell out crowds. Should Mizzou put in some permanent seating like the pictures on this link..? LINK
This is a good story about how the North End Zone is cursed -- LINK -- so should we mix it up?
I was at the game on Saturday, and I will say that the hill just looks sloppy. It reminds me of my high school games, people sitting on the hill against the fence outside the endzone. It looks great for low-attendance games, where it is open and clean, but looks bad for sell out crowds. Should Mizzou put in some permanent seating like the pictures on this link..? LINK
8
Posted on 10/29/13 at 9:57 am to mizzou18
In time. Fix everything around it first.
Posted on 10/29/13 at 10:11 am to reedus23
Rock M should never go.
However adding seats around it and removing the hill seating, as in the pictures you linked to would be acceptable.
However adding seats around it and removing the hill seating, as in the pictures you linked to would be acceptable.
Posted on 10/29/13 at 10:32 am to Koch Snowflake
I've thought for a while that they should do something different with it. I'd love to see the Rock M taken out of the north endzone, and turned into a really cool water feature, either as a vertical fountain in the north concourse, or as a big fountain outside the stadium. One of those big vertical fountains that the water just runs down, you know what I'm talking about?
That way we keep the tradition of the Rock M, and still completely open that north end for seating.
That way we keep the tradition of the Rock M, and still completely open that north end for seating.
Posted on 10/29/13 at 10:41 am to mizzou18
quote:
Rock M is definitely a well-known landmark in college football
Really? I highly doubt it's a well-known landmark to anyone outside a 30 mile radius of CoMO. I find the Rock M a little bush league that we charge $50 for someone to sit on grass or a rock.
I'm for SEMO's idea.
Posted on 10/29/13 at 10:47 am to MIZtigerZOU
Move it. Make a historical display. The Rock M would be interactive - charge people a couple bucks to go have their picture taken.
Posted on 10/29/13 at 11:34 am to semotruman
I've always liked your idea semo. I think it would make for a great visual driving up to the stadium too. Could be really impressive.
Posted on 10/29/13 at 11:54 am to semotruman
quote:
I'd love to see the Rock M taken out of the north endzone, and turned into a really cool water feature, either as a vertical fountain in the north concourse, or as a big fountain outside the stadium.
So you're from Kansas City, eh? lol
Posted on 10/29/13 at 12:00 pm to mizzou18
quote:
So you're from Kansas City, eh? lol
Haha, nope! Grew up in the bootheel, lived in both St. Louis and Columbia.
Posted on 10/29/13 at 12:07 pm to mizzou18
The whole damn place is cursed. Tear down Faurot, make it a grove type thing and build the new stadium on the golf course.
That way we eliminate the bedrock issue, the too tall bowl issue, the grass not growing issue, and the damn curse.
That way we eliminate the bedrock issue, the too tall bowl issue, the grass not growing issue, and the damn curse.
Posted on 10/29/13 at 12:17 pm to Mizzeaux
I like it, Mizzeaux! The only problem there is the golf course. From what I understand, the Gustin family donated the land to the University with the stipulation that it always be used for a golf course. I don't think they can relocate the stadium there, unfortunately.
If we're going to escape the curse, we'd probably have to go further south into that big open area where the MKT cuts through around Hinkson Creek.
If we're going to escape the curse, we'd probably have to go further south into that big open area where the MKT cuts through around Hinkson Creek.
Posted on 10/29/13 at 12:21 pm to semotruman
Or just build it on Providence Point, I don't think they use that anymore anyways.
I'll ride my bike over to the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation HQ and get the money later today. Get that Bama fan that did those renderings last year on the phone.
I'll ride my bike over to the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation HQ and get the money later today. Get that Bama fan that did those renderings last year on the phone.
Posted on 10/29/13 at 12:22 pm to Mizzeaux
I've got some spare change I can add!
Posted on 10/29/13 at 12:28 pm to mizzou18
I have never liked the rock M so easy one for me.
get rid of it
get rid of it
Posted on 10/29/13 at 1:18 pm to HermannMIZ
I like the pics with the rock M minimized not removed.
Posted on 10/29/13 at 6:59 pm to mizzou18
Here's my thoughts on the issue...
The Rock M should stay. It's too traditional. However, like in the Bama fans' renderings, I think bleacher seating should be added around it, and not have anyone sit on it so it will pop on TV.
Also, a second rock M should be added on the outside of the stadium, as some have suggested. It would be a really cool gateway to the facility.
Lastly, as others have also stated, messing with the rock M should be the last thing that the university messes with, especially now that they've renovated the entire hill. The south bowl needs major, major work-as in restrooms added, permanent concessions, and a much larger concourse for fan maneuverability, more like the north concourse. Traffic gets hopelessly backed up on that narrow south concourse. I realize that the water table is an issue, but my thing on that is, if they can build skyscrapers in New Orleans where the soil is just swamp silt with no bedrock, they can build onto, and renovate the south stands at Faurot. Also being in the Mizzou Architecture program, I know this is true. From the looks of it though, the U looks to be taking strides towards majorly improving the south bowl, just not in the immediate future (8-10 years from now according to Alden). The east expansion is taking priority as it should. Stoked for next year when it's completed. It will really make Faurot a much more SEC-esque facility!
The Rock M should stay. It's too traditional. However, like in the Bama fans' renderings, I think bleacher seating should be added around it, and not have anyone sit on it so it will pop on TV.
Also, a second rock M should be added on the outside of the stadium, as some have suggested. It would be a really cool gateway to the facility.
Lastly, as others have also stated, messing with the rock M should be the last thing that the university messes with, especially now that they've renovated the entire hill. The south bowl needs major, major work-as in restrooms added, permanent concessions, and a much larger concourse for fan maneuverability, more like the north concourse. Traffic gets hopelessly backed up on that narrow south concourse. I realize that the water table is an issue, but my thing on that is, if they can build skyscrapers in New Orleans where the soil is just swamp silt with no bedrock, they can build onto, and renovate the south stands at Faurot. Also being in the Mizzou Architecture program, I know this is true. From the looks of it though, the U looks to be taking strides towards majorly improving the south bowl, just not in the immediate future (8-10 years from now according to Alden). The east expansion is taking priority as it should. Stoked for next year when it's completed. It will really make Faurot a much more SEC-esque facility!
This post was edited on 10/29/13 at 7:02 pm
Posted on 10/31/13 at 1:18 am to MIZtyler
quote:
MIZtyler
Being in the Mizzou Architecture program, since it isn't accredited by the AIA you would have to go to another school to become an accredited architect correct? What are you planning on doing after college?
Just curious, because I want to go into architecture but I don't think I would go to Mizzou if that were the case.
Posted on 10/31/13 at 1:32 am to svb
quote:
Being in the Mizzou Architecture program, since it isn't accredited by the AIA you would have to go to another school to become an accredited architect correct? What are you planning on doing after college?
Just curious, because I want to go into architecture but I don't think I would go to Mizzou if that were the case.
You are correct, we are not AIA accredited sadly. It's one of the smallest and least known programs on campus, as well as nationally. Almost no on even knows Mizzou has an architecture program, even people here in Columbia. But...being a Mizzou true son, I couldn't go anywhere else for my undergrad degree. I will have to go somewhere else for 2 more years after I graduate to get accredited. Where that may be I don't really know yet, but since I graduate next year I'm starting to look around pretty seriously.
As for after I get my masters and get accredited, I want to go into sport venue design (See the company Populous for an example of what I want to do. They designed our new east addition to Faurot Field, as well as Baylor's new Stadium, Minnesota's new stadium, and the 2012 Olympic Park in London, which I saw personally in June).
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News