SoCal Deek

Blocked AND confused? Sounds expensive. 😉

With a stadium, the seating bowl is pretty much a seating bowl. After you get past the roof, or no roof, the differences are in the areas outside the bowl itself. Most importantly, in the concourse areas…which are non existent at Rich Stadium. That’s why I’m shocked that they didn’t present any images of those areas. Those spaces are going to be the REAL upgrade.

Well I guarantee it’s not a direct copy of Tottenham but you can certainly see that it’s from the same design firm. And, I’m guessing the Pegulas asked for it to be similar. I’m certain Terry and Kim visited Tottenham with the architects more than once.

Style is always subjective but these are two very different stadium locations. Nashville’s design is a downtown location and I believe the architects are trying to create a downtown vibe with lots of balconies facing the streets so people can be seen in the stadium bars and restaurants, ‘hanging out’ before during and after the game. The other difference with a downtown design is that you cannot get far enough away from the facility to view it all at one time. The narrow streets and surrounding buildings block that kind of vista. The Orchard Park location is in the middle of a parking lot, so you can take in the entire stadium upon arrival. But unlike Nashville there’s no surrounding street atmosphere to engage with, so balconies and patios are somewhat superfluous. Again, this isn’t about style. It’s about the stadium experience.

Ugh…let me rephrase….I’m not talking about what’s possible for the CONSTRUCTION budget. I’m talking about what’s possible to present with the design software. I hope that helps.

In my professional opinion this is 100% going to be the design. They’ve been messing around with this thing for way too long for these to be nothing more than what we call ‘eye candy’. Now with regards to the minimal level of images in this release, I don’t have a clue. It’s possible they’re trying to slowly milk the design for the public relations factor and tease them out over time….but I personally think that’s a huge mistake, especially in light of what Tennessee just showed is possible.

I doubt it. Once the design is set (which is what takes all the time) we can provide literally dozens and dozens of views in the span of a weekend…including a fly around video.

Way to go Gene. You’re a brave man trying to use Revit. It’s definitely not for ‘beginners’…no offense intended. Our people are on it full time and it’s still quite cumbersome.

I have to agree. In the world of architecture, this would be considered a bare minimum presentation for a project of this scale and public interest. Not exactly sure what’s going on here.

We’re 100% Revit based these days and then import the model into Lumion to make these sort of renderings and fly through animations. I’m not sure what software the stadium architects are using.

Not sure how to make this any clearer for you. The difference in a real estate photo is that the object (house or room) your rendering tends to be much much smaller. In the case of a stadium interior we have to ask the computer to put somewhat more of a fish eye lens on the perspective or you simply aren’t going to see much. Your stereo vision eyes can take it all in when you’re actually there, but a single camera angle has to be somewhat forced. I hope that helps.

Correct. Sound waves work very similar to light waves hitting a mirror and bounce the sound back at an angle off the surface opposite from the direction they came. All of this can be modeled to ‘concentrate’ and focus the sound towards a particular surface, like the playing field. The exact opposite technique is used in a performing arts theater where the surfaces are designed to bounce or distribute the sound from the stage in multiple directions so as to avoid echoes and feedback.

Just to clarify for people, these renderings are NOT drawn with a pencil. We create renderings these days by simply taking a screen image of the 3D computer model of the actual architectural design and then use a software filter to make the images appear to be hand drawn. I guarantee they are 100% accurate. Now, that doesn’t mean that the perspective can be a bit deceiving. I hope that clears up some of the confusion.

Having been to Tottenham it’s REALLY clear this was designed by the same firm. I’m guessing the Bills design committee visited London more than a few times during the process.

While I miss-typed the years (off by a decade….oh well, I’m typing into a cell phone by a swimming pool) I still compare this team to those pre-super bowl years. Are they really good? Obviously. But until they get over the playoff hump they’ve yet to reach the promised land.

Well that’s sad. I live in Southern California and have literally zero interest or clue about WNY politics. My questions are purely out of honest curiosity? I have no agenda whatsoever.

I’ve asked a few times now for ANYONE to explain it and have not gotten a single response.

I appreciate the sentiment of the OP, but after the last couple of seasons I don’t think there are ANY Bills fans that don’t believe we have a really good team. Everybody knows that. For me, it’s all about getting through the regular season and into the playoffs where we’ll all see what happens this time. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while…right? Please!!!!

Thanks for your efforts. I don’t think people are injecting ‘politics’ into the discussion. At least not in the traditional sense anyway. I think people are beginning to wonder if there’s a problem that has nothing to do with design renderings, or football…and are sincerely hoping not.

Ha! Yes the 88 and 89 Bills. But I guess one could compare the current roster with the 90 Bills….but what I remember about the 90 team was that going to the Super Bowl was not a reasonable expectation until 51-3 happened, and then it sunk in. Why not us?

You picked the wrong years. The current Bills would be best compared to the 1998 or 1999 teams. The current group hasn’t been to a super bowl. Most people forget that the Kelly era Bills lost to the Bengals in the AFC Championship and to the Browns in a playoff heartbreaker as well before they broke through in 1990.

I only have two words to offer here: Zach Ertz Enough said.

This really has to stop! Is it the gal with the smudged glasses again?

Let me try this again. How is what Billsy put in large font an example of antisemitism? Reads more like he’s cautioning them against throwing in with people who aren’t who they claim to be.

Please explain how you’re super large font is antisemitic. Not trying to be a jerk, but I’m not getting it.