Kadeezy
Active member
I don't hate this with a beefier home side that has the permanent structure, suites, etc.
FIU-Florida International Univ Panthers have a 20,000 seat stadium similar to what is being proposed.
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts, upgrade to remove ads and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your BigSkyFans.com experience today!
Athletic Facilities
- Thread starter Phantom Hornet
- Start date
Or, something like the Jerry Richardson Stadium at UNC Charlotte, which has plans to expand to 21,000 seats. I am speculating that the modular approach ensures getting something up quickly to meet the criteria for Conference USA to extend an invitation to Sac State in football only, a conference that averaged over 16,000 fans per game last year. Woods hinted that an announcement would come regarding football conference affiliation earlier than later in the semester, or as others have posted on X, after the football season ends. My two cents.
Kadeezy
Active member
CUSA is losing LaTech and UTEP over next two years, they'll want to pluck two more teams. I too heard the comments from Wood you're referring to, but his hints turn into hopes pretty quick unfortunately.
Last edited:
HeavyistheClown
Active member
Let’s be completely realistic. No fairy dust dreams. Sac State will NEVER have 30-40,000 fans at a game.
Too many Fall choices: HS football, A’s, soccer, Kings, River Cats, Professional Tiddly Winks, insert new crazy pro team here________.
Why do Wood/Orr, who is using this argument in their defense for being at CE and expansion space needed, keep pimping this pipe dream?
Use the $171M to rebuild current on campus that already has all the amenities (network quality lighting and Comms, Broad Fieldhouse, two multi story parking garages less than 50yds from the gate, modern Fieldhouse, recently upgraded scoreboard, alumni center, tailgate space galore. Except for shitters and gold plated concessions, what’s the REAL reason for CE?
Something smells fishy in Denmark.
Too many Fall choices: HS football, A’s, soccer, Kings, River Cats, Professional Tiddly Winks, insert new crazy pro team here________.
Why do Wood/Orr, who is using this argument in their defense for being at CE and expansion space needed, keep pimping this pipe dream?
Use the $171M to rebuild current on campus that already has all the amenities (network quality lighting and Comms, Broad Fieldhouse, two multi story parking garages less than 50yds from the gate, modern Fieldhouse, recently upgraded scoreboard, alumni center, tailgate space galore. Except for shitters and gold plated concessions, what’s the REAL reason for CE?
Something smells fishy in Denmark.
Bonds need to be repaid. My speculation is that the revenue streams to payback $170M at CE vs on-campus are the main reason for the pivot. Between that and the tariffs, I think alternative options had to be evaluated due to budget constraints. I'm not in the finance space so I'd be interesting to hear perspective on how that all plays into this.
OldSchoolHornet
Active member
Can someone explain to me why Wood didn't know that the money wasn't available before he started making flamboyant promises regarding the stadium?
HeavyistheClown
Active member
Cue SDH, cause of tariffs.
Which I don’t completely buy as the reason. There are ways around that: recycled, American sourced, alternative building materials/construction methods.
I think Dr. Wood had a handshake deal with the PAC-12. The revenue from going to that conference along with the brand would have helped to secure financing. The FBS big boys squashed any new FBS members and sent Sac State scrambling. When the lack of the brand name conference went away, the finances changed.
The overall market economics changed over the past year too. Regardless of the reasons, building anything is more expensive. The cost of the A's stadium ballooned from 1.5 billion to 2 billion for example.
The $171M number for the CE project is very specific, so that should be noted. It should be easier to finance improving a facility, than building a new one. That may factor into the CE decision as well.
The overall market economics changed over the past year too. Regardless of the reasons, building anything is more expensive. The cost of the A's stadium ballooned from 1.5 billion to 2 billion for example.
The $171M number for the CE project is very specific, so that should be noted. It should be easier to finance improving a facility, than building a new one. That may factor into the CE decision as well.
OldSchoolHornet
Active member
What makes you think that Wood had a "handshake deal" with PAC and exactly who was that deal with?
I obviously don't know anything for sure. But the confidence of Wood and Sac12, reports from "media" who were being given information and hints from Dr. Wood that he had some Pac-12 contacts.
I'm not going to dig up old tweets and podcasts, but the totality of it all leaned towards an understanding behind the scenes. Dr. Wood may be brash, but he's not a fool. He was caught off-guard when the Pac-12 declined an invite following their conference meeting. He thought he had something beyond just a sales pitch.
Pac-12 was desperate for a member, still might be , but bringing in an FCS program was never going to be their first choice. He needed to absolutely convince them they were ready, and that didn’t happen.
Part of trying to change the trajectory of the program was putting your neck out. He got more interest than ever before, but maybe not enough. Selling the Metro area was only going to get so far.
Then the Railyards project started moving forward again, the team slumped through 2024, and that seems to have zapped the momentum. Cal Expo is an audible to get something more substantial, and maybe more of a funding source. You lose donors and students when you are not on campus. he has gotten a lot of campus resistance, and the budget projections continue to get worse based on how the state spends money.
if he had a $100mil stadium fund waiting to be spent, that would sway some people. Right now it’s all projections and debt/bond financing. Not a great sales package.
Part of trying to change the trajectory of the program was putting your neck out. He got more interest than ever before, but maybe not enough. Selling the Metro area was only going to get so far.
Then the Railyards project started moving forward again, the team slumped through 2024, and that seems to have zapped the momentum. Cal Expo is an audible to get something more substantial, and maybe more of a funding source. You lose donors and students when you are not on campus. he has gotten a lot of campus resistance, and the budget projections continue to get worse based on how the state spends money.
if he had a $100mil stadium fund waiting to be spent, that would sway some people. Right now it’s all projections and debt/bond financing. Not a great sales package.
OldSchoolHornet
Active member
So your post was purely speculation and conjecture… for a minute there I thought you might actually have some reliable information. You “obviously don’t know anything for sure.”
Carry on.
There is no message board without speculation. You said "Why didn't Wood know that money wasn't available." Who told you he did or didn't know what money he had? You stated it like a fact, but obviously don’t know. It was purely speculation.
If you want just hard cold data, go file a FOIA with the school. You don't need this board for that.
OldSchoolHornet
Active member
At least I’m not just making shit up to look like I have inside knowledge.
I’m curious though…are you saying he knew the money wasn’t there and he still made stadium promises or he thought the money was there and he was wrong?
Last edited:
I'm saying the market changed. The amount of "cash" the school has on hand hasn't changed. The rest of the stadium money would be borrowed or donated and those circumstances changed.
Since Woods initial announcement to build a stadium, Wilton Rancheria bought the Sac Republic and committed to build their own stadium. They have been heavily involved in Sac State sports, but no longer available to be a big donor. The cost of materials increased drastically. Budget cuts to the CSU system makes the optics of CSU system lending money for a football program more dicey. Not getting into an FBS conference means they don't get the millions of dollars in revenue sharing that could be used to secure the borrowing of money through whatever means.
To put it short, there was a series of events, most out of Woods control, that has impacted the funding of the stadium.
HornetFootballFan
Active member
Not sure if this is the actual design? Based upon what I’ve heard from Dr Wood as well as various podcasters etc,
We have a timeline to get a real FB stadium which is the reason many think that we have not received an FBS invitation yet,
I think Cal Expo has permits, funding to help us build. In Synch.
More importantly is “time”. This is the fastest option for us to get a stadium approved etc w goal for 26’ season, I imagine we could get a lot completed if some of this is pre fabricated.
Truly with our history at Hornet Stadium I am excited and grateful for a high quality FBS Stadium. I remember the days of our 1st referendum to keep Football. I was in the quad with fraternity brothers collecting student signatures and votes to save FB.
I want our FB program to have stability. With a new FB Stadium secured for 50 yrs we are in a great position to join an FBS conference.
We’ve come a LONG way!
HornetFootballFan
Active member
Wildcat… we wouldn’t spend over $100M and sign a 50 year lease to stop playing FB.
The new conference for our other 21 Olympic sports is a smart move. In state conference teams that are geographically much better for our budget / travel convenience / fan base.
FB we need to play programs that have larger fan bases and ideally play local FBS teams where travel is via bus within 2 hours to play out of conference or future in conference FBS.
Nevada / Fresno St / San Jose St /. Stanford / CAL, Short 1 hour Flights to San Diego St and UNLV.
If we play in another conference few years. Playing any combo of these teams are great for SAC ST.
This is the WHY we are making changes. The big Sky is and was great for 30 yrs. Economics have changed and FCS $ appears to be drying up compared to FBS revenues.
I missed this part, so maybe others did too. The RFQ is being done by the CSU Board of Trust. They are selecting the builder on behalf of Sac State. So perhaps the funding has already been approved and we're further down the line than we thought.
