TCF Bank Stadium Modifications to Begin This Week

Donate To GopherHole
G

golddust

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Goodbye Gopher turf, hello plain old green field.

TCF Bank Stadium Modifications to Begin Next Week
http://www.newminnesotastadium.com/new-vikings-stadium-news-notes-april-11-2014/

Following the Gophers Spring Game this Saturday, officials will begin to remove the field at TCF Bank Stadium sometime next week, replacing it with the hydronic heated field that will ensure a safe playing surface for the Vikings late games in 2014 and 2015.
 



This reads almost as if the heated field will last only as long as the vikings in TCF Bank Stadium. Is that correct?
 



Schnauzer said:
This reads almost as if the heated field will last only as long as the vikings in TCF Bank Stadium. Is that correct?
Click to expand...

Kind of what I thought also. That really would not make a whole lot of sense to me though....
 

Hopefully it means when they leave a new turf goes on with the permanent logos. In other words, the same as it is only with heating coils underneath. If they agreed to anything else, they should be lined up and shot.
 

Schnauzer said:
This reads almost as if the heated field will last only as long as the vikings in TCF Bank Stadium. Is that correct?
Click to expand...

I didn't necessarily read it that way. I just read it as being Vikings specific (thus only applicable to those two seasons).

That being said I wouldn't be surprised either way. I'm not sure the U of MN really wants or needs this if the Vikings aren't there. I doubt the Vikings care either way because it will probably cost as much to pull out as they would make trying to sell it used. Maybe even more. For the U of MN the cost of maintaining it just for the possibility of one game a year needing it may not be worthwhile.
 

beavergopher said:
Hopefully it means when they leave a new turf goes on with the permanent logos. In other words, the same as it is only with heating coils underneath. If they agreed to anything else, they should be lined up and shot.
Click to expand...
tough, but fair.
 





It looks like it's an in-ground heating system rather than the blanket that was being discussed. I can't imagine that they would remove it when the Vikings leave, that would be quite a teardown. It's not like you rent the heating system for a couple years. It wouldn't be useful to have a heating system that had to be replaced whenever the turf was replaced.

The article didn't say that the Vikings would be putting in a new turf when they leave, but that's been the understanding all along. I was disappointed that the block M wasn't going to be on the field, but the U is getting decent compensation and upgrades.
 




It would make little sense for the Vikings to share a field with the Gophers that was only did-up in Gopher colors and logos. For two years, assuming the U is compensated nicely, they can share a field that is painted up regularly. Works out well for all involved that way.
 

cncmin said:
It would make little sense for the Vikings to share a field with the Gophers that was only did-up in Gopher colors and logos. For two years, assuming the U is compensated nicely, they can share a field that is painted up regularly. Works out well for all involved that way.
Click to expand...

I don't know how big of an issue this was in the agreement, but I'm quite dissapointed that the Gophers did not stipulate that their field be marked as theirs. There would have been a lot of value to having that block M in the middle of that stadium in the middle of that campus for a national NFL audience 8 times a year.
 

Gophers09 said:
I don't know how big of an issue this was in the agreement, but I'm quite dissapointed that the Gophers did not stipulate that their field be marked as theirs. There would have been a lot of value to having that block M in the middle of that stadium in the middle of that campus for a national NFL audience 8 times a year.
Click to expand...

What would the value be? I keep hearing this from people.
 


RodentRampage said:
Advertising. If it's not good advertising, why do the Vikings want their logo on the field?
Click to expand...

I suppose having the blocked m during a Vikings game will bring millions of dollars and every top recruit in the country. It worked for Illinois...
 

lakesgopher said:
I suppose having the blocked m during a Vikings game will bring millions of dollars and every top recruit in the country. It worked for Illinois...
Click to expand...

Again, if logos are as valueless as you seem to think, why are the Vikings so interested in having their logo on the field? Why do companies pay money to have their logos displayed? Are they fools? If it is as valueless as toy seem to think, then you must think them to be fools. The Vikings think it is so worthwhile that they will pay to install two turfs instead of just one.

No one said that having the Block M would bring in millions of dollars and bring in the top recruits - an excellent straw man fallacy, BTW. Yet it still would have been good advertising. While it would have been good advertising, I don't think the U should have walked away from the table over it.
 

RodentRampage said:
Again, if logos are as valueless as you seem to think, why are the Vikings so interested in having their logo on the field? Why do companies pay money to have their logos displayed? Are they fools? If it is as valueless as toy seem to think, then you must think them to be fools. The Vikings think it is so worthwhile that they will pay to install two turfs instead of just one. No one said that having the Block M would bring in millions of dollars and bring in the top recruits - an excellent straw man fallacy, BTW. Yet it still would have been good advertising. While it would have been good advertising, I don't think the U should have walked away from the table over it.
Click to expand...

Lol you are really worked up about me being a smart ass. I think the gophers logo during a Vikings game is meaningless. We have what, 50k students, the U isn't and shouldn't be concerned about a field logo for advertising. We are doing pretty well without it
 

lakesgopher said:
Lol you are really worked up about me being a smart ass. I think the gophers logo during a Vikings game is meaningless. We have what, 50k students, the U isn't and shouldn't be concerned about a field logo for advertising. We are doing pretty well without it
Click to expand...

Add in six million over two years plus modest stadium improvements and for those that think it's important, many glorious wide shots of the stadium. Win-Win.

Edit: And beer sold for longer hours and in more locations.
 

For me, as long as the "U" gets its old field back (with the addition of field heating, of course), complete with block M and painted end zones... I "get it" that during the two years of sharing the field will be generic and painted back and forth for the two teams. There are upgrades and the U is getting $$. Those things make the field compromise okay in my book. As others have said, The stadium will show off nicely even without the block M on Sundays, and wide angle shots will be cool. I will very likely watch more Vikings games this season simply because of TCF Bank Stadium. I'm a bit of a fair weather Viking fan so I don't always go out of my way to watch them when they are not of playoff caliber. Thanks to TCF, I'll probably watch more home games this season.
 

From the beginning, it's been understood that the TCF Bank Stadium turf, which has been used for five seasons, would be replaced at the inception of the Vikings' tenure at the stadium. That new turf would then be used for the two seasons, or three in the event of construction delays, that the Vikes occupy the facility. After the Vikings depart, the turf will be replaced again at the NFL team's expense. This has never been in doubt or dispute. It is spelled out clearly in the user agreement to which the parties agreed.

Regarding the painting of the field during the period in which The Bank hosts the NFL, the Gophers and Vikings both want their logos on the field. NCAA and NFL fields also have some different markings. The arranged compromise is the best of both worlds. For all the talk from many fans about the importance of having U of M logos and markings on the field during Vikings games, it has never appeared to be much or possibly any concern to the U of M. They readily agreed to the Vikings' wishes on this front.

To close things out, the user agreement states that the field to be installed after the Vikings depart will be "new turf with permanent markings as selected by the University". It also says that all decisions regarding the installation of replacement rest with the U of M. So if we get a painted field in 2016 (or potentially 2017 in the event of construction delays) when the new turf goes in, it'll be because of a decision and desire by the University of Minnesota.
 

We see arguments both ways about Vikes vs Gophers logos on the field. Why can't both be there as a display of cooperation and support of One for the Other? Show them both and be proud of both, the fact that we are MINNESOTA STRONG.
 

Maximus said:
Add in six million over two years plus modest stadium improvements and for those that think it's important, many glorious wide shots of the stadium. Win-Win.

Edit: And beer sold for longer hours and in more locations.
Click to expand...

Where did it mention beer hours and locations? The link to the Vikings article didn't work for me and it wasn't in the blog.
 

Tim Riggins said:
Where did it mention beer hours and locations? The link to the Vikings article didn't work for me and it wasn't in the blog.
Click to expand...

The article didn't. When I was at the Bank for the hockey game it certainly appeared that beer would be available everywhere. They had pricing that looked relatively permanent on all the concourse signage. I've heard several rumors also stating that but nothing official from the U. I hadn't heard any rumors about hours (or minutes :p) beer is available. I would be surprised but not disappointed if that changed.
 

BlSVt3ACUAAPDx4.jpg
 

As i have said before being able to see a big maroon block M in the middle of NFL games is the only reason why i was in favor of them playing at TCF and if i would have known that they would put a vikings logo on the middle of the field i would have let them play at St. Thomas. Even if there is little advertisment value which there is it is still a major sense of pride and it puts the vikes in their place.
 

Sports_Realist said:
From the beginning, it's been understood that the TCF Bank Stadium turf, which has been used for five seasons, would be replaced at the inception of the Vikings' tenure at the stadium. That new turf would then be used for the two seasons, or three in the event of construction delays, that the Vikes occupy the facility. After the Vikings depart, the turf will be replaced again at the NFL team's expense. This has never been in doubt or dispute. It is spelled out clearly in the user agreement to which the parties agreed.

Regarding the painting of the field during the period in which The Bank hosts the NFL, the Gophers and Vikings both want their logos on the field. NCAA and NFL fields also have some different markings. The arranged compromise is the best of both worlds. For all the talk from many fans about the importance of having U of M logos and markings on the field during Vikings games, it has never appeared to be much or possibly any concern to the U of M. They readily agreed to the Vikings' wishes on this front.

To close things out, the user agreement states that the field to be installed after the Vikings depart will be "new turf with permanent markings as selected by the University". It also says that all decisions regarding the installation of replacement rest with the U of M. So if we get a painted field in 2016 (or potentially 2017 in the event of construction delays) when the new turf goes in, it'll be because of a decision and desire by the University of Minnesota.
Click to expand...

Well then...let's start with a new kick-ass design.

I'm not against what has been used since TCF opened. But I do like the Nebraska alternating five yard pattern:
<img src="http://media.dma.mil/2011/Sep/3/177939/-1/-1/0/110903-M-0341E-027.jpg" width="50%" height="50%">

I'd say no to trying to duplicate Maryland, or Tennessee (which I think is cool, but is really identified to them).
But doing something like LSU does might be pretty cool:
13474884757LSU.jpg


And I really like what Mizzou does as well:
13474884079Mizzou.jpg


Thoughts? Or am I looking for a solution where there is no problem?
 

Why do the Vikings need to be put in their place? What does that even mean? It's come up from time to time since it became clear they'd be playing at The Bank for a couple of seasons and I don't understand the motivation.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom