Down to Five for the WAC!

[OldHornet]

Looks like Sac will not be joining the WAC anytime soon!

http://blogs.mysanantonio.com/weblogs/utsa/2010/09/benson-teleconference.html

Candidates besides UTSA, Texas State, Denver, Seattle and Montana?


Right now, we're focusing on these five. We will spend our time and attention during this 30-60 day window on those fives. There may be others that are on the peripheral that could come back into play.

If this is the case then let's focus on the following:

1. Joining the Big West for all other sports - This could be a HUGE savings and could help us avoid some of the issues Cal has had to deal with
2. Develop and socialize REAL plans for facilities improvements - No more behind the scenes rumors, let's develop actual campaigns that drive alumni involvement. We need an improved stadium and an improved baskeball facility - even if that means just finding a way to get us to 4k capacity for basketball. I'm tired of waiting for the "arena".
3. Continue to show improvement in football and basketball - I really like both Sperbeck and Katz, now they just need to win championships!!
4. Improved marketing - Competition for entertainment dollars in difficult in the economy so it's time to get creative.

 

[Green Cookie Monster]

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2010/09/29/wac-football-the-latest-on-expansion-options/

Sac State left at the corner sucking its thumb and waiting for another bus that will never appear.

Why arent we clamoring to be let into the Big West if they have known this all along?

I am troubled by the lack of leadership as it concerns the WAC, Big West, facilities and anything related to marketing.

http://www.hornetsports.com/corporate/promotions.asp
This website has not been updated in three years!

 

[NME25]

Not sure why not getting into the WAC is good news. You can build a program, facilities and winning tradition in the WAC. But we won't be relevant by doing good in the big sky. Big time missed opportunity. You join when the opportunity arises. Not when you feel like it. That's why UTSA is fighting so hard for it now even though they don't have a team yet. Can't wait.

 

[OldHornet]

I didn't say that it was good that we didn't get into the WAC, I'm actually disappointed. My point is we missed the opportunity because we didn't have our act together - seriously lacking facilities and vision. We need to finally get serious about being a DI program. Even the Programs in FCS are building impressive stadiums, football or basketball!

The administration needs to get serious!

 

[HornetHope]

I didn't say that it was good that we didn't get into the WAC, I'm actually disappointed. My point is we missed the opportunity because we didn't have our act together - seriously lacking facilities and vision. We need to finally get serious about being a DI program. Even the Programs in FCS are building impressive stadiums, football or basketball!

The administration needs to get serious!

I would not say our opportunity is dead yet. Unless and until the Peoples Republic of California gets its act together, our university effectively has its hands tied, I mean Manure Pile's daddy just had to ax 2 very successful programs because of the finances of our state. Simple economics says Gonzo did not want to be the poster child for some media outlet whining that the drug addicts aren't getting their needles and condoms while these college students are trying to improve themselves.

 

[Green Laser]

My Hornet Brethren,

I do not think that taking a pass at what’s being offered as the new WAC at this point is necessarily a bad thing for us. Too me the new WAC as structured and as most likely to become a reality is not that attractive. Without a additional west coast connection I can’t see Hawaii staying and probably going independent which considering their unique location they could probably get away with. I think that there would be quite a few programs that would find it desirable to take a road game to the Islands. They may be able to get even more home dates out of it. San Jose is probably the weakest link, with their closest rival being Utah State 700 miles away and few other options. San Jose is also the weakest program in the whole mix. They are and will always be the third ball in the Bay Area. They have little following or recruiting muscle in the central valley. Lets just hope that they have enough to beat a weak U.C. Dungpile team Saturday. I think that Montana is too smart to get involved in such a no win situation, even if they were able to be free of towing Montana State with them. You notice that they only went to the meeting in Dallas as an “observer“. I doubt that the mix of Idaho, Utah State, New Mexico State, Texas State, Texas San Antonio, Louisiana Tech and Lamar is going to create the interest that we need to put butts into Hornet Stadium on Saturdays. From a attractiveness stand point I don’t see any advantage over the current BSC. I can’t see this arrangement surviving for very long, I see the possibility of some of the better programs of the BSC going FBS in the future either as part of the BSC or a new FBS alignment. In short I don’t think it is time to panic and jump into a situation that is not necessarily in our long term interest. When we do decide to move the FBS (as I am sure we will do at some point) we should do so when it’s in our best interest, and we are prepared to succeed.

 

[superhornet]

In general, I agree with GL. I do have a few caveats, though. While GL is correct about Idaho, LA Tech, and the as-yet nonexistent UTSA, I do believe that we could riff off of UOP history and develop a rivalry with USU and NMSU. There is an element of USU fans that would dearly love a return to playing Cali schools. Heck, they were always the best-travelled contingent at the Big West Conference Tournament in Anaheim.

While I believe GL is right re the Griz, the potential for the legislature to tie the Kitties to their hip a la Idaho and Boise will likely kill THAT deal regardless of what UM (not to mention UM fans) wants.

Conclusion: the WAC is a disaster just waiting to happen. While I would prefer to remain in the Sky for all sponsored sports due to the regional exposure at limited cost (compare the Sun Belt), I won't be too upset if we somehow end up (as some have suggested) Sky associate members for football and return to the Cali Bus League for most other sports. (Don't forget that we have already been in the CBL for a couple of sports in the past....)

And since when was Lamar on the WAC's list? As much as I would prefer to stay FCS, Sac makes a WHOLE lot more sense in the WAC than Lamar....

 

[SDHornet]

I agree with what has been said. There are definitely pros and cons about either staying put or moving up. Staying put does solidify the fact that this program will never be a serious attraction for the Sac area until a move is made. I also agree that if we are going to stay FCS for another decade or longer, moving to the Big West is the way to go. It just makes no sense spending the money on travel to ship the Olympic sports all across the western US.

 

[SJHornet]

Well, I guess its time to start focusing on our existence in the FCS. I’m disappointed we couldn’t make the jump to FBS, but its certainly not a . I think the recent expansion of Poly and UCFE have made the Big Sky a much more attractive conference, and if we can get Big West membership like our Cali counterparts, we will be in a great position. I’m also certain we have not seen the last train roll out of the FBS station. I think we will see further expansion in the near future when we may be in a better position to transition. This merry-go-round isn’t over yet.

I think our athletic department needs to start focusing on getting into the Big West. I heard about a deal Fulleton had with the Big West that they would agree not to poach Sac State if the Sky added Poly and UCFE. Can anyone else confirm this? I can’t remember the source I heard it from. If this is true, it will be an uphill battle to get in. If its nonsense we need to start planning a move now. The Big West is a perfect fit for us, and will save a bundle.

 

[Green Cookie Monster]

We werent ready to join FCS and the Big Sky-as evidenced by our W/L record in football & bball and the facilities we play in. Sac State will never be proactively ready for FBS. Lets be real.

Either we get dragged to the FBS altar kicking and screaming with a promise to better the facilities or we do nothing and take the easy road in FCS. I say, by experience, we take the easy road and do nothing. Being forced into FBS is/was the only way this school would make the move.

The biggest problem I see is that our two Cali counterparts will use the time to better their facilities and when the time comes again, they will jump and we will be left behind, again.

I still say a FBS conference with the following is the way to go:

Sac State
Cal Poly
SJSU
UCFE
Hawaii
Portland State
Idaho
Montana
Montana State

Until we get a DI appropriate gym/arena and a stadium with permananet bathrooms we aren't going anywhere. Plus, we average 680 to a bball game and 6,800 to a football game, hardly the numbers to sustain a FBS program.

 

[OldHornet]

Until we get a DI appropriate gym/arena and a stadium with permananet bathrooms we aren't going anywhere. Plus, we average 680 to a bball game and 6,800 to a football game, hardly the numbers to sustain a FBS program.

I believe our poor attendance is directly linked to our sub-par facilities. As a fan, if you go to a college event you want to be part of a college atmosphere. The facilities we currently have (although football is improving) scream high school - and thus high school atmosphere.

Numerous people on this board have posted pictures of new stadiums at JMU and Liberty - these are programs that are focuses on being successful and competitive in their current status. We need Wanless to make some serious progress - properly represent Sac St!

 

[SactoHornetAlum]

Until we get a DI appropriate gym/arena and a stadium with permananet bathrooms we aren't going anywhere. Plus, we average 680 to a bball game and 6,800 to a football game, hardly the numbers to sustain a FBS program.

I believe our poor attendance is directly linked to our sub-par facilities. As a fan, if you go to a college event you want to be part of a college atmosphere. The facilities we currently have (although football is improving) scream high school - and thus high school atmosphere.

Numerous people on this board have posted pictures of new stadiums at JMU and Liberty - these are programs that are focuses on being successful and competitive in their current status. We need Wanless to make some serious progress - properly represent Sac St!

No, I think its because we don't have a marketing budget to promote the team. Have you heard all the radio commercials for the Mountain Lions the past 4-5 weeks promoting the first home game last weekend? They still came out to our "crummy" stadium, though the only thing crummy about it now still is the restrooms and press box. The seating areas are fine now and all the amenities the players look for in recruiting we now have (albeit on a smaller scale).

So if the team continues to win and more $$$ is pumped into marketing commercials, then we will see the rise in attendance. JMHO.

 

[Green Cookie Monster]

Until we get a DI appropriate gym/arena and a stadium with permananet bathrooms we aren't going anywhere. Plus, we average 680 to a bball game and 6,800 to a football game, hardly the numbers to sustain a FBS program.

I believe our poor attendance is directly linked to our sub-par facilities. As a fan, if you go to a college event you want to be part of a college atmosphere. The facilities we currently have (although football is improving) scream high school - and thus high school atmosphere.

Numerous people on this board have posted pictures of new stadiums at JMU and Liberty - these are programs that are focuses on being successful and competitive in their current status. We need Wanless to make some serious progress - properly represent Sac St!

20,000 showed up to watch the MoLo's in the exact same stadium the next week. Why cant 20,000 show up to a Sac State game? The MoLo's havent even played a game in town yet and yet they best a program that has been in the same spot for 40yrs.

Something doesnt add up.

 

[SactoHornetAlum]

Until we get a DI appropriate gym/arena and a stadium with permananet bathrooms we aren't going anywhere. Plus, we average 680 to a bball game and 6,800 to a football game, hardly the numbers to sustain a FBS program.

I believe our poor attendance is directly linked to our sub-par facilities. As a fan, if you go to a college event you want to be part of a college atmosphere. The facilities we currently have (although football is improving) scream high school - and thus high school atmosphere.

Numerous people on this board have posted pictures of new stadiums at JMU and Liberty - these are programs that are focuses on being successful and competitive in their current status. We need Wanless to make some serious progress - properly represent Sac St!

20,000 showed up to watch the MoLo's in the exact same stadium the next week. Why cant 20,000 show up to a Sac State game? The MoLo's havent even played a game in town yet and yet they best a program that has been in the same spot for 40yrs.

Something doesnt add up.

See my post above...

 

[superhornet]

I don't understand why you guys seem to be fighting over causes of our failure to attract fans as if they were mutually exclusive. In reality, it seems to me that the factors all of you have brought out are ALL partially to blame.

SD: You seem to equate mere FCS membership with being a dominant force in the Sac market. The fly in that ointment is that barring Pac-12 membership (which is never going to happen), we could make all the low-tier bowl games on the docket, and never get Bee coverage. On the other hand, at the FCS level, we have a shot at a real championship. THAT's why I want to stay where we are.

SJ: You're confusing an "ought to" (i.e. a personal opinion) with a "need to" (i.e. an actual requirement). By strict definition, a "need" is something along the lines of sustenance, warmth, companionship, etc. Returning to the Big West does NONE of those thing. Sure, we might curtail travel costs by hooking up with the Cali Bus League, but we'd also lose the regional exposure we get in the Big Sky. I've always had a pet peeve with how people use words....

 

[SJHornet]

I don't understand why you guys seem to be fighting over causes of our failure to attract fans as if they were mutually exclusive. In reality, it seems to me that the factors all of you have brought out are ALL partially to blame.

SD: You seem to equate mere FCS membership with being a dominant force in the Sac market. The fly in that ointment is that barring Pac-12 membership (which is never going to happen), we could make all the low-tier bowl games on the docket, and that might never happen. On the other hand, at the FCS level, we have a shot at a real championship. THAT's why I want to stay where we are.

SJ: You're confusing an "ought to" (i.e. a personal opinion) with a "need to" (i.e. an actual requirement). By strict definition, a "need" is something along the lines of sustenance, warmth, companionship, etc. Returning to the Big West does NONE of those thing. Sure, we might curtail travel costs by hooking up with the Cali Bus League, but we'd also lose the regional exposure we get in the Big Sky. I've always had a pet peeve with how people use words....

What Big Sky exposure? The half a paragraph in the Sac Bee every now and then, or the score being flashed on KCRA for a few seconds? The Sky gives us top notch FCS football opponents, but other than that it only provides hefty travel costs. The WAC would have given us ESPN and possibly CSN coverage. If we are going to stay in the FCS the Big West will reduce travel costs which can alleviate some of the financial pressure on the program. Our coverage will remain the same. Davis gets more coverage than us now in the Big West. I also still think students and fans would be more interested in schools like Long Beach and Fullerton coming to town (possibly Hawaii?) than Northern Arizona and Eastern Washington. They might not be the most storied names in the NCAA, but their names are far more recognizable for many of us who grew up in Cali. Therefore I see us working for an invitation into the Big West as a NEED.

 

[SactoHornetAlum]

Actually, I think Davis gets less coverage than us only because they are technically not in Sacramento, not because they are in the Big West. Their coverage is about the same or less than us, but not more.

 

[SDHornet]

Regardless, I think we can all agree that anyone FCS in CA will receive little to no media coverage no matter how successful. Cal Poly has been pretty successful in the recent past and how much press do they get compared to a middle of the road Fresno State program? Sac State in the WAC will mean that we will no longer be ignored to the extent that we are now. The WAC and MWC will never get more press than the Pac-25, but it will always out shine the BSC or ANY FCS conference. Essentially the WAC would become a marketing tool/selling point for Sac State to the region mainly because the casual fan actually has heard and/or knows what the WAC is.

 

[Hornut]

Actually, I think Davis gets less coverage than us only because they are technically not in Sacramento, not because they are in the Big West. Their coverage is about the same or less than us, but not more.

Ucfe gets a lot more coverage on Sac's only sports radio, 1140. In fact, one radio guy (Grant Napier) said that if any teams move up to the FBS it should be in this order (1) the faggies, (2) cow polly, and then maybe (3) Sac State. I won't even talk about the faggie commercial, it makes me puke. In fact the only time you hear Hornet regularly is when they talk about the UFL and were the games are at. I wasn't surprised about the crowd at the game on Saturday. 1140 has been advertising for months for that game. I am still pissed about the UFL painting over the S at midfield. I sure hope the mountain kitties didn't take our w.

I had to get that off my chest and you all are the only people that will understand.

 

[Phantom Hornet]

Until we get a DI appropriate gym/arena and a stadium with permananet bathrooms we aren't going anywhere. Plus, we average 680 to a bball game and 6,800 to a football game, hardly the numbers to sustain a FBS program.

I believe our poor attendance is directly linked to our sub-par facilities. As a fan, if you go to a college event you want to be part of a college atmosphere. The facilities we currently have (although football is improving) scream high school - and thus high school atmosphere.

Numerous people on this board have posted pictures of new stadiums at JMU and Liberty - these are programs that are focuses on being successful and competitive in their current status. We need Wanless to make some serious progress - properly represent Sac St!

Definitely disagree about the football facilities...I watched the Mountain Lions game on Versus last Saturday and I can't tell you how many times the announcer said the facility was beautiful