TerryP said:Big difference! No need to mention the libations that you can bring in on Friday but the biggest difference was the food, food and more food. Not to mention avoiding all the lines at the concession stands. It's also a different "tone" to the crowd...not necessarily more subdued, but not as much BS as you might hear in other parts of the stadium.
alagator said:While I cannot comment directly on The Zone experience at Bryant-Denny, I (and our LLC) have similar seats at Florida Field and I absolutely LOVE the amenities and view of the action.
I am a football geek in that I really don't like to socialize during the game - preferring to do that before, at the half, and after the game. With that in mind, Club Seats (or skyboxes) serve a great purpose. Family, friends, business associates can get to the stadium around one hour prior to kickoff and enjoy food and drink in an air conditioned (or climate controlled) environment - not an unimportant factor in Florida in August and September and October, with multiple TVs tuned in to all the games in action. Then when the game starts all can go sit outside and be a part of the 'real' stadium crowd. Back inside for halftime - with easy access to food, adult beverages, and facilities. Back outside for the second half. Back inside for socializing post-game or watch other games - where we can stay until most of the crowd has dispersed. Really, the best of all worlds.
Kinda off topic, but regarding a down-field versus a side-field view. I was a QB and Safety all my playing years and I much prefer the down-field view of the game and action. As Terry alluded, you can see the plays develop in the mind's-eye of a player or coach. You can see blocking angles and seems or gaps in pass coverages that you cannot see from a side-field view. If you never played (or played on the perimeter as a CB or WR mainly) and/or your perspective of the game is mostly from TV coverage (which is terrible in the best of examples), then this might not be the view for you. The only thing you miss with a down-field view is the position of the ball versus the chains or goal line - but with all the in-stadium jumbotrons or TVs that issue is moot.
Completely off topic, I guess. But with digital compression in broadcasting signals today, I wish networks would offer companion broadcasts where one channel had the traditional coverage (side-field view with a concentrated focus on the ball) and a companion channel with a "coach's view" (a down-field view with a broader field-of-view where you see more of how players act in unison and showing the entire scheme effort and not just focusing on the 'result'). I would tune-in to the "coach's view" every time.
So true on the JPW interception.TerryP said:When ESPN announced the lauch of ESPN360 I had hoped they had that in mind...not that I would complain about what it offers.
Just as an example, people would look at the INT vs MSU last year when JPW had the DE right in his face, unblocked, in a completely different light.
alagator said:While I cannot comment directly on The Zone experience at Bryant-Denny, I (and our LLC) have similar seats at Florida Field and I absolutely LOVE the amenities and view of the action.
I am a football geek in that I really don't like to socialize during the game - preferring to do that before, at the half, and after the game. With that in mind, Club Seats (or skyboxes) serve a great purpose. Family, friends, business associates can get to the stadium around one hour prior to kickoff and enjoy food and drink in an air conditioned (or climate controlled) environment - not an unimportant factor in Florida in August and September and October, with multiple TVs tuned in to all the games in action. Then when the game starts all can go sit outside and be a part of the 'real' stadium crowd. Back inside for halftime - with easy access to food, adult beverages, and facilities. Back outside for the second half. Back inside for socializing post-game or watch other games - where we can stay until most of the crowd has dispersed. Really, the best of all worlds.
Kinda off topic, but regarding a down-field versus a side-field view. I was a QB and Safety all my playing years and I much prefer the down-field view of the game and action. As Terry alluded, you can see the plays develop in the mind's-eye of a player or coach. You can see blocking angles and seems or gaps in pass coverages that you cannot see from a side-field view. If you never played (or played on the perimeter as a CB or WR mainly) and/or your perspective of the game is mostly from TV coverage (which is terrible in the best of examples), then this might not be the view for you. The only thing you miss with a down-field view is the position of the ball versus the chains or goal line - but with all the in-stadium jumbotrons or TVs that issue is moot.
Completely off topic, I guess. But with digital compression in broadcasting signals today, I wish networks would offer companion broadcasts where one channel had the traditional coverage (side-field view with a concentrated focus on the ball) and a companion channel with a "coach's view" (a down-field view with a broader field-of-view where you see more of how players act in unison and showing the entire scheme effort and not just focusing on the 'result'). I would tune-in to the "coach's view" every time.
So often I much more enjoy watching a game between two teams when I really do not care who wins. Then I can really just focus on the schemes and strategy of the opposing squads without any care for a desired outcome. A "coach's-view" of such a game would make that experience all the more enjoyable.
alagator said:I guess I share Saban's perspective on the 'process' versus 'results.' Now, granted, the 'result' is in many ways the most important thing (afterall the 'score' really is more important to winning the game than is 'how you play' that particular day), but often the 'how' is a truer indication of progress than the 'what.' And the "coach's-view" is a better view of the 'how,' and more often a offers a better explanation for how the 'how' led to the 'what.'
kayleighsdad said:alagator said:I guess I share Saban's perspective on the 'process' versus 'results.' Now, granted, the 'result' is in many ways the most important thing (afterall the 'score' really is more important to winning the game than is 'how you play' that particular day), but often the 'how' is a truer indication of progress than the 'what.' And the "coach's-view" is a better view of the 'how,' and more often a offers a better explanation for how the 'how' led to the 'what.'
I am 'thoroughly' enjoy 'this' thread. There is 'alot' of 'great' insight here.
'This' is a really cool 'site'.
