University of Memphis – Page 19

Other than the one-mile-per-hour traffic leading west to the Liberty Bowl, the last day of September had the makings of a near-perfect football Saturday in Memphis. With the 15th-ranked Tennessee Volunteers in town — loved by thousands at the Liberty Bowl in orange, loathed by thousands more in blue — the University of Memphis had a national stage (thanks to ESPN cameras) for what has come to be called a “statement game.” Still looking for its first 2006 victory over a Division I-A foe, Coach Tommy West’s Tiger squad had two weeks to prepare for the cross-state SEC behemoth that continues to be the dismissive big brother to the ever-aspiring local program. It was a game to narrow a gap, to open a few more eyes.

Then the Vols’ James Wilhoit kicked off.

Forty-one points, 324 Erik Ainge passing yards, and but a single UT punt later, Memphis had suffered the second worst drubbing in the 21-game history of this one-way series. Only a touchdown pass from Martin Hankins to Duke Calhoun with less than four minutes to play prevented the first shutout in the six-year West era. And the game was every bit as ugly as the final score.

“This was on me,” said a composed West after the game. “I did a very poor job of preparing our football team for this kind of game. The fact is, they were the more physical team, and we didn’t help ourselves by a lot of missed assignments. I still think this can be a good football team, so I have to find a way to make it a good team and bring them along.”

Quite honestly, the coaching staff couldn’t have picked a worse game to open the lid on a new defensive scheme. Having taken over the recently fired Joe Lee Dunn’s chores, West’s aggressive defense merely looked confused as one Vol receiver after another found gaps in coverage. After the game, West admitted the defensive transition is an extra hurdle his team has to leap.

“In the first quarter, I tried to help them too much,” said West. “I was dealing pretty good, bringing linebackers. But they hit some creases with their running game. Then when we went to more of a base defense in the second quarter, I thought we got a little better. But then we had busted coverages on the first two series of the second half. That’s my job to make sure they can check. It was 13-0, and we were a touchdown away from being right in the game.”

Memphis fans would like to think the nullified touchdown scored by linebacker Quinton McCrary on a first-quarter interception return would have made a difference. (The touchdown, which would have given the U of M a 7-3 lead, was wiped out when defensive end Corey Mills was called offsides.) The play would have given the blue side of the stadium something to cheer about — other than a Michael Gibson punt — but it would merely have interrupted the romp.

Things don’t get easier for West’s bunch. If you think Memphis has had trouble with Tennessee (five straight losses now), remember the program’s six-game skid against this weekend’s opponent, the Blazers of UAB. And as a conference foe, UAB is actually a more critical rival than UT for the Tigers to confront. Unless his defense takes considerable strides in a week’s time and Hankins supplants Gibson as the most talked-about Tiger with a ball in his hands, West is staring at a 1-4 record before an October 14th “showdown” with Arkansas State at the Liberty Bowl.

“At least we have a game on tape now,” noted West, “to show them how it works and what needs to be done. You have to trust the defense and run the defense. It can get worse before it gets better, but I stand by the decision [to dismiss Dunn].

“We’re trying to find a way to win a football game. We have to find a way to get a win, and I think we’ll do that. This was ugly, and it kills me. But we have to go to work now and get ready for the next one. We’re not where we’d like to be, but I think we’ll probably get some leaders out of this. When it’s going good, it’s easy.”

The Cecil C. Humphreys Law School at the University of Memphis may pride itself on its academic offerings, but soon it will be able to say it has brains and beauty.

Students and faculty alike have long objected to the state of the current law-school building on the U of M’s campus. The library floods. The heat and the air conditioning don’t always work. The building was in such poor condition that, last year, it threatened the school’s accreditation.

But last week, Bill Nixon of Askew Nixon Ferguson Architects presented the early schematics for the law school’s new home at the old Customs House and current post office on Front Street. Though the project has been in discussions for the last five years, it wasn’t until recently that it became a reality. The federal government agreed to sell the property to the law school for $5.3 million, and earlier this year, the state included $41 million in the budget for the renovation of the building. The law school is expected to move in 2009.

And when Nixon said the school’s new home will “far exceed the beauty of the campus on Central,” he was probably telling the truth.

The original building, done in an Italian style with Tennessee marble, dates back to 1884. An addition was made in 1903, and the facility was renovated in 1929. But since then, it’s remained about the same.

“It fairly shouts, ‘I’m a law building,'” said James Smoot, dean of the law school. “It’s important to us to keep that look.”

The preliminary plans call for a five-story law library in the south wing. A legal clinic will be housed in the basement, along with perhaps a coffee shop or a bookstore in what was once a vault.

“The outside will remain unchanged,” said Nixon. “The interiors will be rebuilt. There will be slope flooring in some of the classrooms.”

In addition to a reading room overlooking the Mississippi River and two areas where students will have access to a rooftop patio, the plan also includes a 270-seat auditorium that will host the school’s large classes and lectures open to the general public.

And the original courtrooms — which now house post-office employees — will hear oral arguments again.

“The courtrooms are in almost the same condition they were in in 1929,” said Nixon. “[The building has] been very well kept-up. The post office has done an incredible job.”

And even after the renovation, some evidence of the postal service’s tenure in the building will remain. The drop ceilings that were added over — er, under — the stenciled ceilings, no. The institutional carpet, probably not. But some of the tinier details — the grills where customers would buy stamps, for instance — will stay.

It’s been years since anyone from the general public has been allowed into the inner sanctum of that building. But judging from the pictures, it’s an elegant, stately facility. There are elaborately carved doorknobs and hinges. Wainscoting runs down the hallways. A number of offices on the third floor still have their original fireplaces.

It might seem like everyone and their mother is heading downtown, but I can’t help think that this move is one of the most important. In terms of growing a creative class, an education node is a must, both in terms of attracting and producing young, vibrant workers. (Let’s face it, the law can get pretty creative when it wants to.) And by locating the school on Front Street, it shows that an educational institution has faith that downtown is a safe and engaging place to be. Maybe more businesses will follow.

Of course, it’s not an open-and-shut case. Student parking is still a question, but then again, student parking is a question on the main campus, too.

“The issue of parking will have to be resolved,” Nixon said in response to an audience question, “whether [parking] comes from this area or one of the garages across the street.”

Either way, I’d say it’s a smart move.