Found this, thought it was cool.
-
Hi Guest,
We've updated the site to combine all the forums that were part of the Big Sky Fans Network into one location. This will make it easier to navigate and participate in all the discussions for each school without having to have multiple accounts, etc. We are still working out some tweaks but please let us know if you notice anything.
With the migration, in some circumstances, your username could have been merged with one of your other usernames from the other forums. If this is the case, you can request to change your username in your account details page of your profile.
Good RWC views
- Thread starter Green Cookie Monster
- Start date
Cool views, the only concern I have with the rec center location is that if Hornet Stadium is ever to undergo a renovation/expansion, there will not be room to make a horseshoe type seating arrangement. And if Sac State is to ever go D1 in football, that space will probably be needed to meet the minimum available seating requirement.
superhornet
Active member
Uh, SD, we already ARE D-I.
StungAlum said:
Minimum attendance is 15K per game for FBS
Minimum stadium seating required is 30K for FBS
Yeah but the NCAA has not been enforcing those standards. They always list it, but it is never enforced....especially the stadium seat requirement. Many schools in the MAC, Sun Belt and even in the WAC have been below those marks (both of them). Personally I think its a myth more than anything.
I was referring to the FBS. My bad for not clarifying.
I'm just saying that not meeting the minimum available seating requirement could be used as a reason to keep Sac State from ever moving up to the FBS. It is something that the planning committee (or whoever makes these decisions) should have kept in mind prior to using up the available space on the north end of the stadium. This may not affect Sac State in the next 5 years, but what about the next 10?
Look, if Idaho can be I-FBS with a 16K soon to be 20K dome, we can be I-FBS with a 21K stadium ourselves.
StungAlum
Active member
Thanks for correcting GCM, I didnt know you had to have a 30k stadium.
SHA I agree, Idaho is a very good example of how the NCAA doesnt follow it's own standards.
SD, if seating ever became an issue at Hornet football games they could always add decks to either side, the stadium is already at 21k. Adding a deck on either side would get the stadium to 30k.
SHA I agree, Idaho is a very good example of how the NCAA doesnt follow it's own standards.
SD, if seating ever became an issue at Hornet football games they could always add decks to either side, the stadium is already at 21k. Adding a deck on either side would get the stadium to 30k.
Or get rid of the track and lower the stadium.
Yes, most of the MAC schools have below 30K and Utah State, Idaho, NMSU, SJSU hoover around the 15-17K mark. The MAC may have been grandfathered in as all the recent schools except FAU have a 30K seat stadium.
The rule used to be that your conference had to maintain 15K attendance overall so an Idaho would be fine drawing 14K fans as long as they played Boise who brings 30K fans.
I think that if a school can remain in FBS fiscally, who cares if they can only draw 8K to a game. In the end the numbers won't hold up and the school will have to drop down.
I do not want to see us attempt this scenario, we would instantaneously be the laughingstock of the FBS world if we tried to do it with the current stadium. If everyone thinks Hornet gym is a joke at DI, try Hornet stadium at FBS. Seating isn't the issue, it is concessions, restrooms, fan experience, etc.
Yes, most of the MAC schools have below 30K and Utah State, Idaho, NMSU, SJSU hoover around the 15-17K mark. The MAC may have been grandfathered in as all the recent schools except FAU have a 30K seat stadium.
The rule used to be that your conference had to maintain 15K attendance overall so an Idaho would be fine drawing 14K fans as long as they played Boise who brings 30K fans.
I think that if a school can remain in FBS fiscally, who cares if they can only draw 8K to a game. In the end the numbers won't hold up and the school will have to drop down.
I do not want to see us attempt this scenario, we would instantaneously be the laughingstock of the FBS world if we tried to do it with the current stadium. If everyone thinks Hornet gym is a joke at DI, try Hornet stadium at FBS. Seating isn't the issue, it is concessions, restrooms, fan experience, etc.
I wouldn't want to be on the top row of current Hornet stadium when the 'Big One' hits.
StungAlum said:
The practice track. If Sac State track can draw 15K to a track meet, keep it, otherwise football has bills to pay.
If this new pro football league plays many games in Sac we will need to also put down plastic grass (turf). I remember a few years ago we looked at turf but decided not to do it because of the javelin divots. :roll:
I would think that with water, fertilizer, etc. we could save $thousands by replacing grass with turf.
The practice track wouldn't have any divot concerns. And we could move the portable seating of Hornet stadium, or part of it, to the practice track and make a sweet 5-6K track stadium. Since we will eventually have a permanent Hornet stadium. :roll: :roll:
I would think that with water, fertilizer, etc. we could save $thousands by replacing grass with turf.
The practice track wouldn't have any divot concerns. And we could move the portable seating of Hornet stadium, or part of it, to the practice track and make a sweet 5-6K track stadium. Since we will eventually have a permanent Hornet stadium. :roll: :roll:
superhornet
Active member
Green Cookie Monster said:
Forget the Big One. We already have at least one incident of a guy falling through the visitors' seats under PERFECT conditions (OK, well, the seats weren't perfect). Glad that Manure Pile lawyer didn't see fit to string us up in court for that.
The Green Hornet
Active member
We'll have a much better chance of getting a new or remodeled football/track stadium only if we keep track. The Sacramento Sports Commission wants to try to get the Olympic Trials again, but the seating is lousy for viewing track, so in order to compete with Eugene and others, we need new seating.
The Olympic Trials had crowds of 24,000 a day. If we expand our new stadium to 30,000 we might get the Trials again and we'd have our FBS stadium too. Spanos' ten million dollar donation was to renovate the track and stadium so that Sacramento could get the Trials, which we did. The University's not going to disregard his contribution and get rid of the track. The Trials brought in more fans in 8 days than the football team did in three seasons.
Sac State is hosting the former Modesto Relays on May 9th for the next three years. We'll also be hosting the national and world master's track meets. Making additional use of the stadium and expanding our opportunities in another sport in addition to football can only help our cause in getting a new stadium. Football's better on grass anyway. Remember, if you get rid of the track program at Sac State, we're out of the Big Sky Conference because track is a core sport.
The Olympic Trials had crowds of 24,000 a day. If we expand our new stadium to 30,000 we might get the Trials again and we'd have our FBS stadium too. Spanos' ten million dollar donation was to renovate the track and stadium so that Sacramento could get the Trials, which we did. The University's not going to disregard his contribution and get rid of the track. The Trials brought in more fans in 8 days than the football team did in three seasons.
Sac State is hosting the former Modesto Relays on May 9th for the next three years. We'll also be hosting the national and world master's track meets. Making additional use of the stadium and expanding our opportunities in another sport in addition to football can only help our cause in getting a new stadium. Football's better on grass anyway. Remember, if you get rid of the track program at Sac State, we're out of the Big Sky Conference because track is a core sport.
