Kings Stay: What it means for Hornet Hoops

[SDHornet]

Kings Stay: What it means for Hornet Hoops

So unless you have been living in a cave, you have heard that the Kings are staying in Sac (NBA officially approved it this week, escrow is set to close on the sale at the end of the week). I’ve loosely followed that whole saga (mostly heard second hand from friends who followed it a lot closer than I) and I have to say it sounds like KJ was instrumental in keeping the team in town and working with the ownership group to hammer out a deal. Obviously the Kings staying means a new downtown arena will be built and supposedly up and running for the 2016 season (3 years in Arco/Power Balance/Sleep Train in the interim). With all that has happened in mind, the question for us Hornet fans is, “What now?”

Regardless of how you feel about the NBA/Kings, a new downtown arena will significantly improve the downtown commercial/entertainment scene. I’ve seen it first hand when SD put in Petco Park, downtown Sac won’t be anywhere near as awesome as the Gaslamp in SD, but it should provide plenty of enhancement opportunities for the Sac region. Having said all this, here are my thoughts about the impact the Kings staying in Sac will have on Hornet hoops. Feel free to chime in with your own thoughts and observations as I am curious on other folks’ thoughts.

The Good
Sleep Train Arena (STA). STA and all of its debt will be handed over to the new owners as part of the sale. I also heard as part of the deal that some minor improvements will have to be made to STA to hold it over in the interim until the new downtown arena is finished. With new business savvy owners at the helm, the door is open for Wanless/Gonzales to see if the new ownership group is receptive to the idea of leasing out STA for some Hornet games (both men and women). The strategic plan identifies this as a goal and I think that opportunity is now wide open given the change in ownership/operations of STA. Sac State already leases STA for graduation each semester so there is already a foot in the door.

New Downtown Arena (NDA). Once this thing is up it’s anyone’s guess what will happen to STA. It is probably in everyone’s best interest to see STA imploded and demolished. I don’t know why the City and NDA operators would want competition against their shiny new asset. Leasing opportunities should still be available for Hornet hoops in NDA. Since the public is subsidizing roughly 60% of the NDA, it is in their best interests (as well as the operators of NDA) to have this place used as much as possible for financial reasons. This is why the Hornet administration should take a proactive approach in leasing the NDA for Hornet hoops.

Hornet Hoops prestige. The lure of playing in a state of the art NBA arena can only have positive impacts on the recruiting trail/attendance/schedule. Even if only a handful of games (more on this later) are played in the NDA, this opportunity should provide a boost for Hornet hoops. The Hornets should be able to leverage any leasing agreement to ink more attractive opponents to come to town (I’m thinking middle-bottom rung MWC, WCC, and P12 programs) as part of a home and home agreement.

The Bad
Why bother? Why invest in Hornet hoops if it will always be in the shadow of the NBA? I don’t think anyone expected droves of casual fans to show up or care about Hornet hoops if the Kings left, but if done properly there was no doubt the potential to capture some of that casual fan base if Hornet hoops were the only show in town. This won’t be the case anymore and one has to wonder how dedicated the Athletic Department will be in supporting Hornet hoops if it is financially a lost cause competing head to head with the NBA.

On-campus events center. While I still feel that the need for an on-campus events center is a priority and its need not impacted with the NDA, the presence of the NDA could diminish the urgency of addressing this need. The urgency would be further reduced if the Hornet administration can obtain some leasing agreements with the NDA. While a leasing agreement with the NDA would benefit Hornet hoops, it could provide the administration with a false sense of security/urgency with respect to facility needs and we all know how complacent the administration can be.

The Ugly
Attendance. The BSC hoops product is awful with a couple exceptions (WSU & UM). As it stands, bottom tier D-1 hoops is not entertaining for casual fans; compared against a (potentially) respectable NBA product bottom tier D-1 hoops will at best be an afterthought. Barring a significant improvement in prestige (winning) and facilities (events center/off campus venue), Hornet hoops attendance will continue to flutter in the low to mid hundreds for the large majority of BSC matchups.

The Nest (Part I). I assume any leasing agreement with the NDA will be on a limited use basis. Meaning only a handful of games (both men and women) will be played in the NDA. I feel the leasing agreement should be leveraged specifically to improve OOC scheduling. This means The Nest will still be used for a majority of the games, especially the BSC games. So as much as the program can tout the excitement and opportunity of playing in a venue the NDA offers, the flip side of the coin is the rest of the games will be spent in the decrepit Nest.

The Nest (Part II). If Wanless/Gonzales can hammer out a leasing agreement with the NDA, the odds of scrapping a new on-campus events center and just expanding/refurbishing The Nest increase. A plan that relies on the Nest as a long term solution will not be beneficial to Hornet athletics in any way, shape, or form. Personally I think any expansion/refurbishing ideas for The Nest is a terrible and a total waste of money.

 

[Green Cookie Monster]

I would have to disagree on The Bad section. there are many NBA/University towns that do quite well living together. Saying, 'why bother' is a little draconian.

Memphis
Houston
San Antonio
Miami
Charlotte
Orlando

Sac State will never be a national power and will always be in the shadow of the NBA, PAC12, but anything is better than Hornet gym.

I don't think the new Kings owners will be as tight assed about actually contributing back to the community as the Magoofs. I think if approached correctly this bevy of investors/developers can assist in getting something moving for Sac State's vision and growth.

How can a city that claims to be NBA worthy not support it's own DI university? Currently, Sac State is not in the shadow, it's invisible.

Hornet Gym is the Achilles heel of the University. If they want to be taken seriously, something has to be done regarding facilities.

 

[Green Cookie Monster]

I think the NBA should be played in a 18K seat NBA arena and I think Sac State should build an on campus facility in the 8-10K range as alternatives to smaller functions.

Hornets had a few tournaments at ARCO long ago and were laughable in the big building. Attendance overall hasn't changed in 25yrs., playing in a 18-20K seat arena is overkill. Students wont attend, an $8 general admission ticket to Hornet Gym now costs $25 after parking, will keep the casual fan at bay.

Hornets need their own identity and renting only reinforces the public's perception that Sac State is 2nd rate.

 

[superhornet]

In general, I agree with you, GCM. But I don't remember parking being that high. The last time I was up for a Hornet game (I don't remember what game it was, but it might have been the football game Kadeezy sprung for my ticket), I didn't pay $17 for parking. If they're REALLY charging that, the administration is full of it....

(Of course, given administrators in our past, I wouldn't put it past them....)

 

[Kadeezy]

I've never paid for parking at a Hornet athletic event. Parking is free in the gym area lot after 5:00 I think, and no passes are needed on the weekend either (football).

 

[superhornet]

Oh, I think I get what GCM is saying. The ticket that WOULD be $8-10 at The Nest would likely double in price AND get an additional parking charge at ARCO/Power Balance/Sleep Train/Whatever the Next Corporate Name Is if home games are moved there. That really WOULD keep the casual fan away....

 

[Green Cookie Monster]

Oh, I think I get what GCM is saying. The ticket that WOULD be $8-10 at The Nest would likely double in price AND get an additional parking charge at ARCO/Power Balance/Sleep Train/Whatever the Next Corporate Name Is if home games are moved there. That really WOULD keep the casual fan away....

Bingo, give SH a balloon.

If you don't own it, everything cost more.

 

[Kadeezy]

Roger!

What if the games were just down the road at the new Kings arena and the school worked out some sort of exemption for parking?

I guarantee you the numbers would be in the 5k range for games with alcohol, the new arena proximity, etc. The team might even develop a minor league basketball type following similar to the Rivercats. I know there are a couple alumni in the ownership group so we'll see.

Still the best option IMO is smaller on campus event center.

 

[SDHornet]

Good points. I don’t think a deal would be worked out with parking as that is how the downtown arena is getting paid for in the first place. I guess light rail and the transit system would be options if it is still free for students, but I doubt many students would have the patience to use them. The school could always arrange a shuttle to transport students to and from the game.

I agree with Kadeezy; booze + the allure of playing in a new venue downtown could draw in some casual fans. I think 5k is a little optimistic though; my guess would be in the 2-4k range but would largely depend on who is on the schedule. A weekend tilt against a regional name (Cal, Stanford, Nevada, etc) could probably have a good showing at the turnstile.

 

[sacstateman]

There is talk again about an on campus facility. It would be 6 to 8k seating and paid for (at least in theory) by student fees. I don't know any more specifics.

 

[SDHornet]

I don’t see the students agreeing to another fee increase unless the one passed in 2004 is still valid (or it is forcibly enacted by Gonzo). Private donations (corporate and individual) will have to be a major component of funding.

 

[SJHornet]

I'm really happy for the city and Kings fans everywhere. This arena effort was the most epic effort to save a team I've ever witnessed. Well done mayor Johnson and all involved.

Now that we can expect a shiny new state-of-the-art arena in the near future, I think it would be in the program's best interest to take advantage of the facility. I don't think we new to look at making it our home, but rather play 10 or so games a season in the new arena. Some key pre-conference games where we could lure the likes of Cal, Nevada or other top tier programs, and a few important or select conference games. It would certainly help on the recruitment front, and the ability for fans to drink at the games and see the new marvel at cheaper prices could bring in decent crowds.

Along with booking several dates at the venue, we need to focus efforts on a new building on campus, or significant upgrades. If a new scaled down arena truly is on tap, I will be beyond elated. However, I believe there are several alternatives that could be explored as well. The Nest could undergo a drastic renovation that ups capacity a bit, but more importantly, created top-of-the-line locker rooms with all the amenities and luxuries, new team specific weight rooms, coaching offices, meeting rooms and other training and comfort features. Now that the athletic offices have moved, and the Well houses the rec facilities, a lot can be done in the old building. It can definitely become a recruiting tool.

Another idea came to me While visiting Santa Cruz this winter, I had a chance to stop by the new Kaizer Permanente Arena, home of the GS Warriors minor league club the Santa Cruz Warriors. It is a 2,500 seat facility (that can be expanded) that is essentially a glorified temporary arena. It was built for $3,5 million, has locker rooms, vendor space and several basic amenities. Its not fancy or state-of-the-art, but it serves its purpose and can be a cheap alternative that would take far less resources. Maybe 2,500 would be small, but for not much more, we could build a 4-5,000 seat arena much like Santa Cruz. I was reading an article with an interview with the architect/designer of the London Olympic arena (also a temporary structure with 12,000 seats and full suites, media booths an all the bells and whistles) and he was saying that structures like these are basically piece parted together, they are very durable and cheap to upkeep and can be used for long periods of time (several decades). In fact he was pitching for Milwaukee to purchase the Olympic arena and relocate it as a long-term home for the team for a mere $50 millon. It is a cheap idea, and hey, we already have a temp stadium that's become permanent

Anyway, just a few thoughts I wanted to put out there.

 

[Hornet25]

What I've been saying for awhile is that we should just play our home games in the NDA. I understand the resistance. "We're not big enough to fill it.""It costs too much." Got it. The way I look at it is, it is a large upfront cost to build an on campus arena, which we are trying to find a way to raise money for. Leasing out the NDA does not require that large up front deposit. Playing in it immediately adds value to your program. Yes, the NDA is too large for the BSC, but so what. We're playing in a gym that is too small for everything else. Would rather be in too large a space, than too small.

Playing in the NDA could do a couple of things. It could sway a few extra kids our way when we are recruiting, thus increasing the speed at which we build our program. It will also increase our ability to play larger programs within the area and profit off of the attendance that you can't get in the hornets nest. I'll argue that just playing a few games a year with those larger programs in the NDA doesn't take full advantage of BOTH of these opportunities. The NDA has to be the hornets home, or it doesn't count in recruiting. Over time you can build your way up to getting 10,000 fans in the seats. With the hornets nest, you can't build towards anything. You've maxed out your profit and attendance.

If you lease out the NDA it will benefit the city, school and Kings owners. Reason for all three to put effort into promoting the program. Save the money you were going to spend on the on campus arena and put that towards remodeling the football stadium. My :twocents:

 

[SDHornet]

Good points H25 and SJ. The issue I see with using the NDA for every game is not that it’s too big (that’s what she said ), but rather the cost of renting it out for those games when SUU and UNC come to town. Will there be enough butts in the seats for those horrible matchups to at least break even? Maybe that won’t be an issue if this program can notch more wins in the coming years.

Maybe they slowly work their way up from renting it out for 5-6 games a year and increase as needed based on turnout and program success? The other issue will be actually getting those regional names floated in this thread to come play in Sac, and this is where a poor RPI comes into play. Not many programs will want to play Sac if we remain an RPI anchor on the schedule…so does playing in a talent rich area in a state of the art venue with possibly a regional TV broadcast trump an RPI anchor road game?

 

[Green Cookie Monster]

I only see playing 2 maybe 3 games a year there per year. No matter what a good deal the NDA can offer, it will still cost way more than the gate receipt.

Think security, parking, cleaning, etc. everything is multiplied in a giant 18K+ NBA arena with at most 1-2,000 Hornet fans. If something is built on campus it can be used for graduations, speakers, concerts, trade shows, career seminars, Trekkie conventions and it can employee dozens of student workers to provide the public interaction jobs.

Offsite and all money goes offsite. Onsite and you provide student jobs and more buy-in from the students.

The main reason the university has a D1 athletic program is for public outreach, how can you draw the public to the school when the rented facility is offsite, miles away?

 

[SDHornet]

Not every concession booth and aisle will have or need an attendant on staff during the event. The top bowl would be closed off and everyone would have to sit in the lower portion of the arena.

What does it cost to rent a venue of that size out for half a day? On the low end say 1,000 people buy a ticket at $15 a pop and that’s a cool $15k. Assuming the NDA is used for only bigger draws and at least a few thousand shows up, so say 2,500 people at $15 a ticket is over $37k. Then there is money being made on concessions on top of that. I don’t see an issue with at least breaking even on the marquee matchups, but I have a harder time seeing BSC matchups breaking even which is why I don’t think renting the NDA for every single game makes cents (sic).

 

[Hornet25]

I may have gotten ahead of myself with the every game at NDA idea, since we are in the Big Sky. Switching to the NDA to play our games may need to coincide with the school getting out of the Big Sky and into a more appropriate regional conference. Mountain West? I always thing big.

 

[josephpoint]

Wonder if Sac State fans have interest in Big Schy opponents

 

[SJHornet]

Wonder if Sac State fans have interest in Big Schy opponents

I think they do, and don't. The biggest issue with the Big Sky is the conference has limited publicity out here. The market here is too saturated with the multiple pro teams, Pac 12, WCC and Mountain West. Even the Big West gets better coverage for the most part. The Hornets being the only full member in California causes the conference to take a major back seat, and our programs don't exactly demand attention. When I've visited the northwest and Utah, I was surprised to see the level of prominence the Big Sky held. It wasn't Pac 12 exposure, but the conference was in the news, team apparel was more visible, and you'd see adds for the sporting events advertised on a far greater scale and outside their immediate market.

Alumni and students (those who actually acknowledge we have a program) are familiar with our conference mates, and will be more inclined to see a Hornets matchup with a Weber State or NAU, especially if there are post season implications. Many of us are familiar with the brands and may hold particular memories connected to the schools. The Montanas are the only schools in the conference that have some appeal to those who may not have knowledge of our conference makeup. If a resident drove by a billboard or came across an advert, I'm not sure a Hornets-Bengals matchup would garner much interest. However, if the conference was able to sign a second media deal, the Big Sky could start to reach the common fan. Root doesn't reach Northern California, alienating us. If we could sign some sort of deal with the new Fox Sports networks, I think we could finally pull in some of the casual fans. The CAA has their deal with NBC Sports, and I remember being able to watch games like William and Mary against Delaware and JMU vs Maine, giving them exceedingly more exposure. I watched a few with my father-in-law (killing time on a lazy Saturday morning), and I remember him picking up who the schools were, and paying some attention to some FCS news/match ups, even recognizing some schools once march madness hit. It wasn't much, and it helped that his son-in-law was an FCS nerd, but I can see a few people here and there recognizing their local team, and perhaps paying a visit to the ticket booth perhaps, after a little media love came to town.

Its a hard problem to fix, and while a major marketing campaign, or major success at the national level would help the program put butts in the seats and clear the shelves at the bookstore, our conference will offer fringe support. But the Big West and WAC wouldn't offer any better, and unless we build a 40,000 seat replacement to Hornet and a new arena, the Mountain West will be another windmill to chase. The BW offers us fellow Cali schools, but we loose our exposure outside the state. Plus, the BW draws similar crowds to the ones we draw now. The WAC gives us exposure outside the state, but our fan base would care even less about the make-up of that league. It will all come down to our program showing potential on the field/court and the Big Sky's name actually reaching California before we get the casual fan through the gate. I like the conference, and it has enormous potential, but both sides simply need to start making more waves out here.

I went off on a bit of a rant there. But that's the long version. Our fans care, and don't at the same time, but the potential for them to care a lot is out there.

 

[SDHornet]

Fans have shown they want to show up, but I think the poor facilities burry us. As it stands now, the Nest gets packed for promotion nights, senior night, and Causeway. During the Hornet hoops pinnacle in the mid 2000’s the Nest was packed for every home game. With improved facilities I think the Hornets could average about 1,500 fans for those uninteresting BSC matchups and easily double that for the games that currently pack the Nest. Those projections would easily increase with a more entertaining and successful product on the floor, which should come hand in hand with new facilities.