If Bergman is correct, they did not fully investigate the possibility of a new arena. That’s a major, major mistake and it doesn’t seem as if the committee truly addressed the concerns Bergman had. The cost is ridiculous for what we’re having done. The more I read, the more I think we’re messing this whole thing up.

This is like what I had in mind when I mentioned earlier about bringing in the west end and reclaiming the space, rather than any westward expansion that would end up abutting the Acosta Ctr.

My biggest problem with “centering” plans that only call for making the baseline bleachers extend further toward the court with a lower rise is that they leave the 200 and 300 baselines just as far removed from the game.

After further review, I see it calls for bringing in the EAST end, but the same comments apply re: bringing all the seating closer rather than just the arena level.

For me, that implies that to do so would be lengthy, complicated, and/or expensive.

I was originally on the fence, but have read more and seen the costs for other arenas. $200M for a renovation is absolutely usurious. Particularly if they did not do their due diligence for a new arena. Would it have killed them to look into a design that looks like Pauley on the outside but is completely new on the inside? I like the idea of the bricks on the outside, to fit with the rest of campus…but there are no brick buildings around Pauley! The seating plan just doesn’t do it for me. It’s just a little band aid job. Frankly I don’t understand how this project can cost $200M. It’s ridiculous.

As someone commented on Dohn’s blog, this “renovation” seems to bring Pauley from the 60’s to the 80’s…and the insignificant donation that I was going to make shall now go to diapers instead.

I never really realized how inadequate Pauley has become until reading that. Know it is clear why Athletics went through five different firms. It seems clear that they had their heart set on keeping the original Pauley, and every firm told them otherwise until NBBJ, who’s plan looks to be nothing more than lipstick on a pig.

I am now in favor of starting from scratch and building a new arena somewhere else on campus. A multi-purpose venue is still needed for gymnastics, concerts, graduation, etc. so Pauley can remain as is, but a good basketball arena just does not mesh with Pauley’s design. Go into Westwood, go to the old Med Center, go to the dilapidated area behind the dorms at Sunset and Veteran, hell just go somewhere and build an intimate basketball only arena with proper amenities and facilities. Otherwise, just do nothing and save the 185+ million dollars that they are about to throw away.

of the NBBJ plan is especially damning. To go forward with the existing plan when superior, more cost-effective alternatives have already been proposed would be unconscionable. I have no problem renovating the current structure (my preference would also be Alternate Scheme 2), but if we go that route, let’s at least do it right.

Do the UC Regents have the final say on this?

Simple suggestions:

Lay out your arguments.

Blog about it. We have fanposts here on BN that allows you to do just that.

If you are that passionate about it, then hit at this topic relentlessly. Challenge the Morgan Center and UCLA officials to engage in debate with fact based analysis. We did this during the Dorrell era. We know it works.

It is up to the people who feel passionate about it to take leadership and charge online. You can start right here on BN. Message board style rants will probably won’t do much.