Tucson Development Thread

[HooverDam]

If you think Phoenix has no soul or rich history you're either 1. ignorant or 2. too stupid to live. Those are really the only choices.

[poconoboy61]

Originally Posted by aznate27

And I don't understand why some people are so resistant to other solutions to traffic problems other than freeways?? Freeways are not the end all to traffic nightmares, they can be nightmares in themselves. All one has to do is look at the gridlock in most major cities with extensive freeway systems.

It's time people start thinking outside the box when trying to come up with solutions to our transportation problems. The age of just building freeways to solve congestion is on it's last leg. Like it or not mass public transportation will be the next big solution in the future, especially with the whole green movement.

Who said that I was resistant to other solution than freeways? I said in a recent post that Tucson needs to work on public transit AND its freeway system. I think you would like freeway construction to be on its last leg, but its not. Gas is still quite affordable for most, the overwhelming majority of Americans still own cars.

The green movement has picked up momentum, but that doesn't mean people are throwing away their cars in exchange for mass transit. Priuses cause congestion too.

Originally Posted by PHX31

I would have let your little rant go... but then you threw out this last paragraph. You call him out for not knowing what he's talking about in regards to grade-separated intersections... then you state Phoenix (and LA!) are souless, no-history cities... which proves you don't know what you are talking about. LA has more history in it's little finger than Tucson could ever hope for... just look at the "Noirish LA" thread in Found City Photos. And every city has their own unique history, especially Phoenix. I had first hand insight into only one aspect of Phoenix's history when I worked on the construction of the light rail and we came across dozens of Hohokam canals and burials, complete with skeletons and pottery, jewelery, tools, etc. And that's just some of Phoenix's prehistoric history. (see my photo thread link in my sig if you want to see a bit of Phoenix's remaining history.)

BTW, somethingfast, and aznate, Grand Avenue is a good example of grade-separated intersections in Phoenix. There are about 6 or 8 throughout the metro area. Although Grand created 6-lane intersections, so it's even better they were separated.

Tucson is the longest continuously settled community in the United States. How again does LA have more history than Tucson? Oh, I guess because LA is a larger city, it MUST have more history?

Comparing the history of Phoenix to that of Tucson. Ridiculous. Tucson comes out on top.

I don't know why Phoenicians feel the need to come to this forum to try to prove that their city is greater than Tucson. I guess Phoenix can't stack up to cities of comparable size, so posters are forced to compare it to a city 1/3 of its size, and still they are proved wrong.

[kaneui]

Bleachers at the north end of Arizona Stadium would be replaced with a
four-story glass structure; McKale Center would get wraparound enclosed
concourses and other enhancements.
(photo: Aaron J. Latham)



UA's $378M sports upgrade
Arizona Stadium, McKale included in 12-project plan

By Patrick Finley
ARIZONA DAILY STAR
09.02.2009

The University of Arizona athletic department aims to spend $378 million over the next 20 years or so to upgrade its sports facilities, officials said Tuesday afternoon. The most comprehensive plan in department history covers 12 major projects. The most prominent are the construction of a building in Arizona Stadium's north end zone and a McKale Center upgrade. The cost, spread out over the next two decades, will be paid for solely with private funds and is pending approval from the Arizona Board of Regents in either December or January, athletic director Jim Livengood said. Arizona Stadium construction could begin after the 2010 football season and be completed two to three years later.

Livengood said he is sensitive to the current financial climate, but the projects need to be started. He wouldn't reveal how much money he had raised for the project but said it was "accurate" that the 18-month-old plan would not have come this far without assurances from donors. "The people that say, 'You know, this just doesn't make sense during this time,' I understand that," he said. "My only answer is, it needs to be started. It needs to be thought about, it needs to be worked on." Livengood and senior associate athletic directors Kathleen "Rocky" LaRose and John Perrin revealed the plans at a McKale Center meeting Tuesday in response to repeated public-records requests from the Star.

Livengood outlined the plans, with the first step being the $82 million Arizona Stadium project. The centerpiece will be the construction of a four-story, mostly glass building in the area now now occupied by aluminum bleachers in the north end zone. The structure would have about 5,000 premium seats, replacing aluminum benches. The proposed building would house football offices, locker rooms and a public concourse. A new video board would be located in the south end zone. Stadium capacity won't change dramatically, but the department would earn more income from the more expensive seats. "It will certainly be much more income-friendly then our current 4,500 metal bleacher seats," Perrin said. "There's no doubt it will help us." Arizona athletics also wants to acquire Bear Down Field, located behind the north end zone, from another UA department. Artificial turf would be installed for a team training area. Jimenez Practice Field would be expanded, with lighting and drainage improvements. Naming rights to the end-zone building and the stadium itself will be available, Livengood said.

Once football offices are moved to Arizona Stadium, McKale Center renovations could begin. A rendering of the renovated McKale Center reveals enclosed concourses that wrap around McKale Center in a proposed $155 million plan. Locker rooms, equipment rooms, showers, offices and lounge areas would be upgraded. The 36-year-old arena would also feature upgraded concessions areas, bathrooms, air conditioning and premium seating. A new gift shop would be located at the south end of Cherry Avenue parking garage. "You're either going to try to play big-league baseball with big-league bats," Livengood said, "or you're going to try to play big-league baseball with Little League bats." Livengood, whose contract expires next year, said he would "love to have the burden" of carrying out the projects in the upcoming years. "But I have no control over that," he said.

Most UA teams could receive facility renovations as part of the project. The athletic department consulted with each coach in recent months about their needs. The most recent major department project, the Richard Jefferson Gymnasium, cost $20 million. The basketball and volleyball practice facility, which includes an adjacent diving well, opened last year. Asked whether he thought fans would be upset with him over the $378 million price tag, Livengood tried to distance his future from the discussion. "This project right here, there will be some that I'm sure it will offend the heck out of," he said. "In the end, it's the right thing for Arizona athletics. It really has very little to do with me."


By the numbers

$378 million - projected expense for 12 major UA athletic department construction projects over next the 20 years

$155 million - estimated cost for McKale Center upgrade

$82 million - estimated cost for Arizona Stadium expansion

$27 million - Hillenbrand Aquatic Center improvements

$17 million -Kindall/Sancet Stadium (baseball)

$15 million - Drachman Stadium (track and field)

$9 million - Murphey Field (soccer)

$5 million - Hillenbrand Stadium (softball)

$4 million - Robson Tennis Center

Funds not listed will be used for redevelopment and upgrades for other UA athletic facilities.

[PHX31]

Originally Posted by aznate27

And when I speak of "history" I wasn't referring to before the city of phx was built.

Well, then, please see my signature line and check out that thread. That shows just a bit of city of phoenix built history (that's left).

Originally Posted by poconoboy61

Tucson is the longest continuously settled community in the United States. How again does LA have more history than Tucson? Oh, I guess because LA is a larger city, it MUST have more history?

Comparing the history of Phoenix to that of Tucson. Ridiculous. Tucson comes out on top.

Ummmmm, exactly. Just because something is older, doesn't mean it has more "history". That's like saying a 100 year old man that has spent the past 50 years of his life in hospice has a more interesting history than the 70 year old dos equis "world's most interesting man". A tiny settlement prodding along doing nothing for 5,000 years does not have nearly the history (again, it's not all about time) of a huge city that has seen thousands of historical events come and go. The history book of Tucson would be 50 pages long, whereas that of L.A. would be a 30-part series of encyclopedias. Phoenix would be somewhere in the middle... but closer to Tucson.

Meh, arguing on the internet against people like this is a lot like:

[PHX31]

Originally Posted by kaneui

Bleachers at the north end of Arizona Stadium would be replaced with a
four-story glass structure; McKale Center would get wraparound enclosed
concourses and other enhancements.
(photo: Aaron J. Latham)



UA's $378M sports upgrade
Arizona Stadium, McKale included in 12-project plan

By Patrick Finley
ARIZONA DAILY STAR
09.02.2009

The University of Arizona athletic department aims to spend $378 million over the next 20 years or so to upgrade its sports facilities, officials said Tuesday afternoon. The most comprehensive plan in department history covers 12 major projects. The most prominent are the construction of a building in Arizona Stadium's north end zone and a McKale Center upgrade. The cost, spread out over the next two decades, will be paid for solely with private funds and is pending approval from the Arizona Board of Regents in either December or January, athletic director Jim Livengood said. Arizona Stadium construction could begin after the 2010 football season and be completed two to three years later.

Livengood said he is sensitive to the current financial climate, but the projects need to be started. He wouldn't reveal how much money he had raised for the project but said it was "accurate" that the 18-month-old plan would not have come this far without assurances from donors. "The people that say, 'You know, this just doesn't make sense during this time,' I understand that," he said. "My only answer is, it needs to be started. It needs to be thought about, it needs to be worked on." Livengood and senior associate athletic directors Kathleen "Rocky" LaRose and John Perrin revealed the plans at a McKale Center meeting Tuesday in response to repeated public-records requests from the Star.

Livengood outlined the plans, with the first step being the $82 million Arizona Stadium project. The centerpiece will be the construction of a four-story, mostly glass building in the area now now occupied by aluminum bleachers in the north end zone. The structure would have about 5,000 premium seats, replacing aluminum benches. The proposed building would house football offices, locker rooms and a public concourse. A new video board would be located in the south end zone. Stadium capacity won't change dramatically, but the department would earn more income from the more expensive seats. "It will certainly be much more income-friendly then our current 4,500 metal bleacher seats," Perrin said. "There's no doubt it will help us." Arizona athletics also wants to acquire Bear Down Field, located behind the north end zone, from another UA department. Artificial turf would be installed for a team training area. Jimenez Practice Field would be expanded, with lighting and drainage improvements. Naming rights to the end-zone building and the stadium itself will be available, Livengood said.

Once football offices are moved to Arizona Stadium, McKale Center renovations could begin. A rendering of the renovated McKale Center reveals enclosed concourses that wrap around McKale Center in a proposed $155 million plan. Locker rooms, equipment rooms, showers, offices and lounge areas would be upgraded. The 36-year-old arena would also feature upgraded concessions areas, bathrooms, air conditioning and premium seating. A new gift shop would be located at the south end of Cherry Avenue parking garage. "You're either going to try to play big-league baseball with big-league bats," Livengood said, "or you're going to try to play big-league baseball with Little League bats." Livengood, whose contract expires next year, said he would "love to have the burden" of carrying out the projects in the upcoming years. "But I have no control over that," he said.

Most UA teams could receive facility renovations as part of the project. The athletic department consulted with each coach in recent months about their needs. The most recent major department project, the Richard Jefferson Gymnasium, cost $20 million. The basketball and volleyball practice facility, which includes an adjacent diving well, opened last year. Asked whether he thought fans would be upset with him over the $378 million price tag, Livengood tried to distance his future from the discussion. "This project right here, there will be some that I'm sure it will offend the heck out of," he said. "In the end, it's the right thing for Arizona athletics. It really has very little to do with me."


By the numbers

$378 million - projected expense for 12 major UA athletic department construction projects over next the 20 years

$155 million - estimated cost for McKale Center upgrade

$82 million - estimated cost for Arizona Stadium expansion

$27 million - Hillenbrand Aquatic Center improvements

$17 million -Kindall/Sancet Stadium (baseball)

$15 million - Drachman Stadium (track and field)

$9 million - Murphey Field (soccer)

$5 million - Hillenbrand Stadium (softball)

$4 million - Robson Tennis Center

Funds not listed will be used for redevelopment and upgrades for other UA athletic facilities.

Hmmmm, I wonder where the UofA's sports priorities lie... definitely trying to keep their idea alive that they are an elite basketball school. I don't want to try to pretend like I know anything about ABOR, but aren't most of the ABOR members from UofA or UofA sympathizers? Of course they'll vote to approve this. Didn't ASU's recent development of a new basketball facility include a huge private donation (that's why it is called the Weatherup Center ... and I think Richard Jefferson donated to a new UofA facility recently)? Shouldn't college's spend their money on academics? Shouldn't private donations be required in the case of a huge planned sports expenditure like this?

[aznate27]

Originally Posted by HooverDam

If you think Phoenix has no soul or rich history you're either 1. ignorant or 2. too stupid to live. Those are really the only choices.

Wow, you took a healthy debate and turned into a grade school malicious fight. How about just contracticting my claims with your own reasons to love Phoenix rather than calling someone names?? Apparently you got nothing but name calling and mud to sling.

Oh, hey, I hear your mom calling...she needs to change your diaper. In other words, grow up.

[aznate27]

Originally Posted by PHX31

Well, then, please see my signature line and check out that thread. That shows just a bit of city of phoenix built history (that's left).



Ummmmm, exactly. Just because something is older, doesn't mean it has more "history". That's like saying a 100 year old man that has spent the past 50 years of his life in hospice has a more interesting history than the 70 year old dos equis "world's most interesting man". A tiny settlement prodding along doing nothing for 5,000 years does not have nearly the history (again, it's not all about time) of a huge city that has seen thousands of historical events come and go. The history book of Tucson would be 50 pages long, whereas that of L.A. would be a 30-part series of encyclopedias. Phoenix would be somewhere in the middle... but closer to Tucson.

Meh, arguing on the internet against people like this is a lot like:

Phoenix was a city of just 100,000 in 1950. That means nearly ALL of it's population growth has only occurred in the last 59 years!!!! How does that make it have more history than a city that has exsisted for over 200 years????? It proves that just because you're bigger, doesn't make your history richer. It means that in the last 20 years Phoenix has seen out of control growth and sprawl which cuts those 59 years in half. Not very rich when you look at it that way eh?

When you think of visiting Phoenix, you don't think of history, you think of shopping, nightclubs, golfing (maybe, Tucson has Phx beat on this one too), resorts, freeways, casinos and modernization.

When you think of visiting Tucson, you think of the San Xavier Mission, the Sonoran Desert Museum (world famous), Pima Air and Space museum, Dillinger Days, Old Tucson Studios (rich in Hollywood westen history), El Presidio Historic District (great walking tour btw), Fort Lowell ruins in Ft. Lowell Park, St Augustine Cathedral (which was recently restored and beautiful!), 4th Avenue with it's electic shops and restaurants not to mention the great street fair held twice a year (very popular with the locals), Tucson Meet Yourself which celebrates Tucsons RICH cultural background held every year and attended by thousands, Colossal Cave, UofA (Arizona's first university), the Arizona Inn once (and still) popular with Hollywood stars and built by Isabella Greenway, Arizonas first congresswoman and personal friends with the Rosevelts. And Tucson has done great in trying to correct the mistakes of the past and restored some of the gems downtown that are historical, like the Fox and Rialto Theaters. Don't forget Tucson's inportant military history from the Rough Riders of the 1800's to Davis Mothan AFB (Arizona's largest military base). There's Hiking from the desert to the forest on Mt. Lemmon, and Tucson has been named as one of the best bike friendly cities in the U.S., and of course golf. All this is just the tourist info, it's what people come to Tucson for....it's history.

You can not say that when someone says "let's visit Phoenix" they're wondering where all the historical places are to visit. Phx can't touch Tucson in that catagory. Phoenix is great for concerts, shopping, and just wanting to get away...not for it's history.

[Leo the Dog]

This argument is worthless. Tucson is Tucson...yes its older, but who cares, nobody goes there for its history. Nobody comes to Phoenix for history either. Thats not who we are, or what we're trying to sell.

FYI: San Xavier is beautiful, but thats not in Tucson city limits is it? No. The beautiful foothills aren't in Tucson city limits either (along with many of the resorts). Neither is your airport. In fact, much of what you stated above, aren't in Tucson proper, and I do think that you were contributing to the idea that Scottsdale and Tempe nightlife shouldn't be considered Phoenix nightlife because they're aren't within Phoenix city limits.

[PHX31]

Originally Posted by aznate27

Phoenix was a city of just 100,000 in 1950. That means nearly ALL of it's population growth has only occurred in the last 59 years!!!! How does that make it have more history than a city that has exsisted for over 200 years????? It proves that just because you're bigger, doesn't make your history richer. It means that in the last 20 years Phoenix has seen out of control growth and sprawl which cuts those 59 years in half. Not very rich when you look at it that way eh?

When you think of visiting Phoenix, you don't think of history, you think of shopping, nightclubs, golfing (maybe, Tucson has Phx beat on this one too), resorts, freeways, casinos and modernization.

When you think of visiting Tucson, you think of the San Xavier Mission, the Sonoran Desert Museum (world famous), Pima Air and Space museum, Dillinger Days, Old Tucson Studios (rich in Hollywood westen history), El Presidio Historic District (great walking tour btw), Fort Lowell ruins in Ft. Lowell Park, St Augustine Cathedral (which was recently restored and beautiful!), 4th Avenue with it's electic shops and restaurants not to mention the great street fair held twice a year (very popular with the locals), Tucson Meet Yourself which celebrates Tucsons RICH cultural background held every year and attended by thousands, Colossal Cave, UofA (Arizona's first university), the Arizona Inn once (and still) popular with Hollywood stars and built by Isabella Greenway, Arizonas first congresswoman and personal friends with the Rosevelts. And Tucson has done great in trying to correct the mistakes of the past and restored some of the gems downtown that are historical, like the Fox and Rialto Theaters. Don't forget Tucson's inportant military history from the Rough Riders of the 1800's to Davis Mothan AFB (Arizona's largest military base). There's Hiking from the desert to the forest on Mt. Lemmon, and Tucson has been named as one of the best bike friendly cities in the U.S., and of course golf. All this is just the tourist info, it's what people come to Tucson for....it's history.

You can not say that when someone says "let's visit Phoenix" they're wondering where all the historical places are to visit. Phx can't touch Tucson in that catagory. Phoenix is great for concerts, shopping, and just wanting to get away...not for it's history.

You're joking, right? I mean that's the first thing that came to my mind and I can't fathom anything else. I don't think anyone could make less sense and contradict themselves (or just be plain ignorant - to Phoenix, our history, and what it's all about) any more in a single post then you just did.

It boils down to opinions on most of your points (Tucson has Phoenix "beat" in golf??? pffffft). And just to crush only one of your measley points (don't have the time to make a long useless post), Tucson has the Arizona Inn (never heard of it, and judging by the website, it's a nice, yet tiny little place), while Phoenix has the San Carlos, Westward Ho, and Biltmore... all 3 have wayyyyyy more history, especially with "Hollywood stars", and are far more well known, especially the Biltmore. Go here: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...83#post4205183 to see a great thread on the Westward Ho by HooverDam. Actually, there are a bunch of threads where you can learn about Phoenix's history if you want to educate yourself, rather than be completely ignorant to everything.

EDIT: If you want to throw out everything that happened in Phoenix after 1950, fine, likewise. Phoenix had a population of 100,000 in 1950, Tucson had a population of 45,000 in 1950... you do the math.

[azliam]

Originally Posted by PHX31

You're joking, right? I mean that's the first thing that came to my mind and I can't fathom anything else. I don't think anyone could make less sense and contradict themselves (or just be plain ignorant - to Phoenix, our history, and what it's all about) any more in a single post then you just did.

It boils down to opinions on most of your points (Tucson has Phoenix "beat" in golf??? pffffft). And just to crush only one of your measley points (don't have the time to make a long useless post), Tucson has the Arizona Inn (never heard of it, and judging by the website, it's a nice, yet tiny little place), while Phoenix has the San Carlos, Westward Ho, and Biltmore... all 3 have wayyyyyy more history, especially with "Hollywood stars", and are far more well known, especially the Biltmore.

EDIT: If you want to throw out everything that happened in Phoenix after 1950, fine, likewise. Phoenix had a population of 100,000 in 1950, Tucson had a population of 45,000 in 1950... you do the math.

OK

Now this is getting quite ridiculous. Can we not all agree that Phoenix is bigger and for that reason, has more amenities (some nicer) than Tucson and that shouldn't be discounted? Tucson in its own right has much to offer (and also some nicer) and shouldn't be discounted by a few egos from Phoenix as well. Both of these cities offer plenty of things to do and they are quite similar in some things and different in others. I know many people (like myself) who enjoy going to Phoenix. I certainly wish more Phoenicians would venture down to Tucson to really experience it without blinders on. Yes, it is not Phoenix. There's a reason - it's called Tucson. This state doesn't need 2 Phoenix's nor 2 Tucson's - one of each with suffice.

[PHX31]

Originally Posted by azliam

OK

Now this is getting quite ridiculous. Can we not all agree that Phoenix is bigger and for that reason, has more amenities (some nicer) than Tucson and that shouldn't be discounted? Tucson in its own right has much to offer (and also some nicer) and shouldn't be discounted by a few egos from Phoenix? Both of these cities offer plenty of things to do and they are quite similar in some things and different in others. I know many people (like myself) who enjoy going to Phoenix. I certainly wish more Phoenicians would venture down to Tucson to really experience it without blinders on. Yes, it is not Phoenix. There's a reason - it's called Tucson. This state doesn't need 2 Phoenix's or 2 Tucson's - one of each with suffice.

Ummmm... no one from Phoenix is discounting Tucson. It's the folks from Tucson do that, saying Phoenix has no soul or history, blah, blah, blah.

I agree with your above... however, you better check with the Tucson peeps.

[azliam]

Originally Posted by PHX31

Ummmm... no one from Phoenix is discounting Tucson. It's the folks from Tucson do that, saying Phoenix has no soul or history, blah, blah, blah.

I agree with your above... however, you better check with the Tucson peeps.

You know that is false. I have dealt with my own issues from Phoenix posters in the Phoenix thread who are always cracking jokes about Tucson and discounting it - in some cases due to their ignorance.

[somethingfast]

Originally Posted by aznate27

The base of "A" Mountain is one of the oldest continuously inhabited areas of the U.S., 5,000 years of history.

lol, 5,000 years and those guys STILL can't get a freeway built, 'nuff said

[HooverDam]

Originally Posted by aznate27

Wow, you took a healthy debate and turned into a grade school malicious fight. How about just contracticting my claims with your own reasons to love Phoenix rather than calling someone names?? Apparently you got nothing but name calling and mud to sling.

Oh, hey, I hear your mom calling...she needs to change your diaper. In other words, grow up.

Near as I can tell you haven't made any points about how Phoenix has no history because there's no points to be made. A city thats over a hundred years old in its present form, has millions of people living in it, and was the cradle of an ancient civilization of course has a history. You're just being a fucking ignorant retard if you claim otherwise.

Please enlighten me on what books you've read on the history of Arizona or the Salt River Valley. Have you looked into the subject in any capacity? Arizona and Salt River Valley history is rather interesting to some (myself included) and to say that Phoenix has no history is obviously a willfully ignorant statement.

The debate was never 'healthy' and you started the mud slinging with fucking retarded comments like:

Phx is just a souless, no history city that has already loss it's identity.

Did you really think that was productive or non mud slinging? Phoenix obviously has a history and definitely has a soul and identity. They may not be a soul and identity you particularly like, but thats not to say they don't exist.

[Vicelord John]

Originally Posted by PHX31

Ummmm... no one from Phoenix is discounting Tucson.

I am.....

Tucson, Phoenix's retarded little brother.

[Luke Skyscraper]

Originally Posted by Vicelord John

I am.....

Tucson, Phoenix's retarded little brother.

OMG, LOL!

[Leo the Dog]

Originally Posted by azliam

I certainly wish more Phoenicians would venture down to Tucson to really experience it without blinders on. Yes, it is not Phoenix. There's a reason - it's called Tucson. This state doesn't need 2 Phoenix's nor 2 Tucson's - one of each with suffice.

I think the reason Phoenicians don't venture down to Tucson in mass droves is that Tucson is pretty much the same thing as Phoenix, but much smaller. Why drive 1.5/2 hours away to sit in the same miserable heat. Yeah its a little cooler (3-5 degrees), but its still hot as balls down there.

If I'm going on a road trip in AZ its gonna be up north or east to the mountains and outdoors, (where its 25 degrees cooler) its not gonna be to another urban area in the desert. I may as well drive to Mesa if I want that. In less than two hours I could be in Prescott, Sedona, Flagstaff, Payson, The Rim, The Lakes, or well on my way to SD/LA/Las Vegas.

If I'm driving to Southern AZ, I'm going to Bisbee, Tombstone, Nogales, The Catalinas Mtns, Kitt Peak, Puerto Penasco...NOT a mid sized city that doesn't offer anything else that Phoenix already offers.

[BrandonJXN]

And people think that LA and San Francisco can't get along.

[HooverDam]

Originally Posted by ThreeHundred

And people think that LA and San Francisco can't get along.

The ASU v UA rivalry is certainly one of the fiercest in the Nation and most filled with actual hate as opposed to some which are friendly rivalries (IE Oregon St v Oregon).

Phoenix and Tucson have somewhat legitimate reasons to hold grudges against each other as well. Tucson seems eternally upset abut missing out on the capital which it feels like it should've had being the oldest city and having it before Phoenix. Then of course there's Tucsons not so well hidden anger about Phoenix growing much faster and becoming the states dominate city. Its clear that Tucson seems to harbor some jealously about that.

From Phoenix's point of view its all about education. While its the bigger and more regionally important city, Tucson through its control of ABOR has hamstrung Phoenix in the only way it can by denying the area high quality higher education. They've at every turn tried to hurt ASU and thus the Valley in general. Of course this is petty and short sighted as it hurts the whole state.

All that being said Im glad to see ASU & UA are (academically) burying the hatchet. No one outside of Arizona knows or cares about Phx v Tucson, and the two cities need to work together to make the "Sun Corridor" region nationally competitive which it certainly isn't at the moment.

[TAZ4ate0]

^True....and well said.

The ASU vs UA rivalry is the worst (fiercest and most bitter) I have ever seen, and I used to think that the Ohio State and Michigan rivalry was bad.