Liberty opened their yet-to-be-finished $8+ million dollar stadium before a full house of 2,500+ on Saturday with a win over Penn State, en route to a series sweet of the Nittany Lions. I like our stadium a lot, but it sure would be nice to have a facility like this in Boone. Hopefully our baseball team will keep up the winning ways under Coach Jones and we can add to Smith Stadium, continuing to make the facility more impressive. Below are links to a couple of articles about the stadium at Liberty.

http://www.liberty.edu/flames/index.cfm ... 2&TeamID=1

http://www.newsadvance.com/news/local/a ... 0f31a.html

And here is a link to a thread on the stadium on the Liberty message board. A lot more photos on this construction thread:

https://www.flamefans.com/forums/viewto ... &start=400

I like Smith Stadium as well but it is not comparable to this. Regardless of anyone's opinion of Liberty, they've got great facilities. I'd kill to have a stadium like that on campus and be able to fill it.

I'm sick of people saying ASU doesn't "need" to be associated with Liberty. Their facilities are every bit as good and in a lot of cases better than ours.

App had the opportunity several years back for a facility like that. White Sox owner and ASU alumn Don Beaver wanted to bring a Rookie League team to Boone. He would have built a park to major league specs and all he wanted to do was to sell beer during those games. Previous administration said nope. College and Rookie League seasons do not conflict.

Kgfish wrote:I'm sick of people saying ASU doesn't "need" to be associated with Liberty. Their facilities are every bit as good and in a lot of cases better than ours.

App had the opportunity several years back for a facility like that. White Sox owner and ASU alumn Don Beaver wanted to bring a Rookie League team to Boone. He would have built a park to major league specs and all he wanted to do was to sell beer during those games. Previous administration said nope. College and Rookie League seasons do not conflict.

That was a major league mistake for the previous administration -- but no surprise, I guess. Would have been a big benefit to ASU and a positive addition to the local economy.

That is a nice looking park. It reminds me of the Asheville Tourists stadium in Asheville, NC. We will be expanding the seating a ton at Beaver field soon, which I look forward to, but a stadium like this isn't in the cards for App State. Liberty has a LOT of offering plate cash flow to throw around.

Do you honestly think a $20 bill thrown in at Thomas Road Baptist Church goes to athletics facilities funding at Liberty? With the old St. Luke's property, the old Methodist Church, where the Turchin Center is now, and the Presbyterian Church property across the street from the Post Office, App may have more Church property than Liberty has at the moment.

AppinVA wrote:Do you honestly think a $20 bill thrown in at Thomas Road Baptist Church goes to athletics facilities funding at Liberty? With the old St. Luke's property, the old Methodist Church, where the Turchin Center is now, and the Presbyterian Church property across the street from the Post Office, App may have more Church property than Liberty has at the moment.

Of course not. It's a private school wit ha TON of money that is more religious than most religious schools. My hyperbole has been flying right over people's heads here recently.

Wow, what a park

Kgfish wrote:I'm sick of people saying ASU doesn't "need" to be associated with Liberty. Their facilities are every bit as good and in a lot of cases better than ours.

App had the opportunity several years back for a facility like that. White Sox owner and ASU alumn Don Beaver wanted to bring a Rookie League team to Boone. He would have built a park to major league specs and all he wanted to do was to sell beer during those games. Previous administration said nope. College and Rookie League seasons do not conflict.

My guess is that "facilities" has nothing to do with it. If I remember correctly, our SGA voted to ask the administration not to schedule Liberty after some comments made by Falwell after 9/11. I'm not sure whether that has any bearing on the present, though.

I could be wrong but I believe we've faced them in field hockey, wrestling and some of the non-revenue sports.

It's been a good while since we've scheduled them in football, baseball or basketball. I'm not sure of all the details but the SGA passed a resolution not to renew contracts with Liberty after some of Falwell's post-9/11 comments.

http://sga.appstate.edu/index.php?modul ... ith&id=155

asumike83 wrote:I could be wrong but I believe we've faced them in field hockey, wrestling and some of the non-revenue sports.

It's been a good while since we've scheduled them in football, baseball or basketball. I'm not sure of all the details but the SGA passed a resolution not to renew contracts with Liberty after some of Falwell's post-9/11 comments.

http://sga.appstate.edu/index.php?modul ... ith&id=155

Careful mentioning any half-way Christian organization in a half-way negative light on the MMB. Some of these folks will get very upset with you, no matter how much sense you make.

asumike83 wrote:I could be wrong but I believe we've faced them in field hockey, wrestling and some of the non-revenue sports.

It's been a good while since we've scheduled them in football, baseball or basketball. I'm not sure of all the details but the SGA passed a resolution not to renew contracts with Liberty after some of Falwell's post-9/11 comments.

http://sga.appstate.edu/index.php?modul ... ith&id=155

Thanks for the link...maybe my memmory isn't as bad as I thought it was.

Gonzo wrote:

asumike83 wrote:I could be wrong but I believe we've faced them in field hockey, wrestling and some of the non-revenue sports.

It's been a good while since we've scheduled them in football, baseball or basketball. I'm not sure of all the details but the SGA passed a resolution not to renew contracts with Liberty after some of Falwell's post-9/11 comments.

http://sga.appstate.edu/index.php?modul ... ith&id=155

Careful mentioning any half-way Christian organization in a half-way negative light on the MMB. Some of these folks will get very upset with you, no matter how much sense you make.

Gonzo wrote:
Careful mentioning any half-way Christian organization in a half-way negative light on the MMB. Some of these folks will get very upset with you, no matter how much sense you make.

My God, you just tried to blame far right social conservative religous people for building codes and a noise ordinance, passed by a town council of democrats!

The mayor endorsed Obama for heavens sake. Another claims to be a proud NC democrat. Another is a former ASU professor, another describes herself as a progressive democrat.

Where are these far right religious extremists that are passing these ordinances?

Why dont you do a little research before you start blaming "religious conservatives?"

GlassOnion wrote:

Gonzo wrote:
Careful mentioning any half-way Christian organization in a half-way negative light on the MMB. Some of these folks will get very upset with you, no matter how much sense you make.

My God, you just tried to blame far right social conservative religous people for building codes and a noise ordinance, passed by a town council of democrats!

The mayor endorsed Obama for heavens sake. Another claims to be a proud NC democrat. Another is a former ASU professor, another describes herself as a progressive democrat.

Where are these far right religious extremists that are passing these ordinances?

Why dont you do a little research before you start blaming "religious conservatives?"

You can't see the forrest from the trees, can you?

How ever they voted in the presidential election and how they feel about the thousands of other issues facing the country today ect doesn't matter in this context. I am talking about two specific pieces of legislation that reflect the socially conservative nature of the MAJORITY that passed them. I didn't blame "far rights," I blamed social conservatives. These people could be hard corps dems in every single other issue for all we know. That didn't stop them from supporting the noise ordinance or the student housing moratorium. Keeping the school from growing (keeping the number of dissenting student votes down/trying to promote growth in the non-student population) and toning down the "party scene" indicates socially conservative values in that majority. As soon as the results came in for each piece of legislation, my point was proven

Now I can't prove that their opinion on the two matters is a direct result of their religious affiliation, so I guess I'll concede that and agree to disagree with you.

Gonzo wrote:

GlassOnion wrote:

Gonzo wrote:
Careful mentioning any half-way Christian organization in a half-way negative light on the MMB. Some of these folks will get very upset with you, no matter how much sense you make.

My God, you just tried to blame far right social conservative religous people for building codes and a noise ordinance, passed by a town council of democrats!

The mayor endorsed Obama for heavens sake. Another claims to be a proud NC democrat. Another is a former ASU professor, another describes herself as a progressive democrat.

Where are these far right religious extremists that are passing these ordinances?

Why dont you do a little research before you start blaming "religious conservatives?"

You can't see the forrest from the trees, can you?

How ever they voted in the presidential election and how they feel about the thousands of other issues facing the country today ect doesn't matter in this context. I am talking about two specific pieces of legislation that reflect the socially conservative nature of the MAJORITY that passed them. I didn't blame "far rights," I blamed social conservatives. These people could be hard corps dems in every single other issue for all we know. That didn't stop them from going out and voting for the noise ordinance or the student housing moratorium. Keeping the school from growing (keeping the number of dissenting student votes down) and toning down the "party scene" indicates socially conservative values in that majority. As soon as the results came in for each piece of legislation, my point was proven

Now I can't prove that their opinion on the two matters is a direct result of their religious affiliation, so I guess I'll concede that and agree to disagree with you.

I don't see how you can look at clear cases of social engineering and see conservatism. We must be looking at different forests.

I cannot believe he is attempting to defend that position. This isnt even funny, its downright scary.

GlassOnion wrote:I cannot believe he is attempting to defend that position. This isnt even funny, its downright scary.

When you are able to wrap your brain around the concept of an individual having conservative values in some subjects and liberal values in others, maybe you'll believe it. I can't believe you actually condescendingly lectured me on libertarianism when you can't even fathom someone having values of both.

appst89 wrote:

Gonzo wrote:

GlassOnion wrote:

Gonzo wrote:
Careful mentioning any half-way Christian organization in a half-way negative light on the MMB. Some of these folks will get very upset with you, no matter how much sense you make.

My God, you just tried to blame far right social conservative religous people for building codes and a noise ordinance, passed by a town council of democrats!

The mayor endorsed Obama for heavens sake. Another claims to be a proud NC democrat. Another is a former ASU professor, another describes herself as a progressive democrat.

Where are these far right religious extremists that are passing these ordinances?

Why dont you do a little research before you start blaming "religious conservatives?"

You can't see the forrest from the trees, can you?

How ever they voted in the presidential election and how they feel about the thousands of other issues facing the country today ect doesn't matter in this context. I am talking about two specific pieces of legislation that reflect the socially conservative nature of the MAJORITY that passed them. I didn't blame "far rights," I blamed social conservatives. These people could be hard corps dems in every single other issue for all we know. That didn't stop them from going out and voting for the noise ordinance or the student housing moratorium. Keeping the school from growing (keeping the number of dissenting student votes down) and toning down the "party scene" indicates socially conservative values in that majority. As soon as the results came in for each piece of legislation, my point was proven

Now I can't prove that their opinion on the two matters is a direct result of their religious affiliation, so I guess I'll concede that and agree to disagree with you.

I don't see how you can look at clear cases of social engineering and see conservatism. We must be looking at different forests.

They seems like examples of both, to me (especially the noise ordinance). But if our only point of disagreement is which term to assign to the same exact phenomenon, I will happily agree with you.