"Best facilities in FCS" is subjective because it requires a comparison to things that are alike and unalike at the same time. Also, it's at absolute best a temporary comparison because the arc of time from state-of-the-art to average to obsolete is shockingly short.
In my experience, however, there's a real pitfall when it comes to discussions of facilities, especially when it comes from fans and/or administrators (aka, people paid to be fans). Facilities can either be a tool or a crutch and people forget that no family-named scoreboard or shiny glass lobby ever won a damn thing. Eventually, facilities become more of a university marketing element and there's often a nearly arbitrary expectation that school's fanbase "deserves" a certain level of results on the field given the school's "commitment to facilities", many of which may or may not actually contribute to the development of the program. A lot of coaches have been done in because the university built a glossy new building around them.
Bookmarks