That is totally life.

Meanwhile there is an article on the Sac Bee website reporting that Sac State as a whole is facing a $45 million budget cut.

Wasn't it being hyped that SAC12 had $50 million ready for NIL? Looks like they're looking for a little more...

They didn’t even have enough funding to provide the poor fella with knee length football pants. That’s no way to live.

Late to the party but wanted to chime in on the Rec Hall / Pavilion renovations.

We had the opportunity to turn the joint into more of a Maples Pavilion type facility and totally blew it. Maples isn’t as elongated along the length of the court but still has a similar setup with the lower level separated from loge and upper levels which are accessible by the same concourse.

The upper pull-out seats with ginormous gaps between sections was a horrible oversight and looks half-hearted (I’d use another word, but…). Yes there are emergency exits up there but nobody clearly asked the question as to how wide and what kind of vertical clearance they required; that would have allowed the seats, if they still needed to be pull-outs, to maintain horizontal connectivity and not look temporary.

Agreed on the center-hung scoreboard, but at least the video board on the one end appears from a distance to be better than the boards that were previously attached in the corners.

this is a venue I worked on designing. I drew some inspiration from the Pavilion actually, but replaced the loge seats with a flexible suite/box level, stacked a fixed upper bowl on top, and moved the concourse behind the seating. It’s about 8000 seats. Not sure if the Pavilion has the vertical clearance to rework like this. We determined in this case it was more cost effective to narrow the function of the arena and build a 100,000sf expo hall adjacent than to add more transformable elements.

Makes sense! Something like that would be ideal depending on funding/budget, but by what was renovated I assumed that it was far too small for something like that.

it seems like the problem with the Rec Hall (going way back) was that it was a multi functional space. Basketball arena, but with all that open space up top for classes, indoor running, etc. The foldout bleachers feel like they are there only for graduation (and those early ESPN Games). Even with a good crowd it never feels very full.

The previous top bleachers that closed towards the court made it more intimate, seating what, 3500? It seemed to hold the noise in, too.

Reducing seating capacity seems like it was a disaster. There had to be other options. So now the community doesn't get the big concerts, and graduation seating is more limited.

I preferred the large numbers over the exits, and the IM photographs. It's current use seems surprisingly limited.

I liked the old configuration better too. My guess is that the new configuration better suits Campus Rec uses. Until the 2000s, the Pavilion/Rec Hall housed all functions of the ARC under its roof. They found a way to use every square foot and its size and scope were light years anything our D2 contemporaries had in the 1970s. It’s been nearly 50 years and it’s still probably one of the more capable venues in the Big West. Probably bottom third of MWC. Open question if it is worth a major renovation or if it makes more sense to fully absorb it as part of the ARC and build a new major venue in the next 10-15 years.

It seems Campus Rec and ICA control a lot of its activity, but it was built for students. Are physical education classes (or their substitutes) still held there?

I don't see a need for a larger venue, but many DI coaches want a "basketball only" facility.

The corners and the clearance are problems. Also that’s expensive! Davis could do a larger version of McCarthy at Ganzaga within the existing building footprint. The hoops programs really need more seats that are closer to the floor.

admittedly I have not been to an Aggie hoops game in a long time. I caught a few minutes of one on ESPN+ recently and it looked pretty dead with some sort of roped off area on the floor where the band and Aggie Pack overflow used to be. And as far as expensive? Nothing is expensive when it’s someone else’s money!

one end of the floor is bleachers where the band and GA fans sit. The other end is the ‘fast break lounge’ where you can buy pizza and drinks, including beer and wine, and watch the game at stools. Kinda fun to watch from there.

Where is that?

https://statehornet.com/2025/01/sac-state-asi-loan-fbs-football/

BREAKING: ASI approves $2.5 million loan for a potential FBS transfer

The loan is half of what Sac State needs to move up

Not exactly.

They "voted to approve conversations of a resolution" - so they're going to discuss it.

The actual title is: "BREAKING: ASI approves conversations of $2.5 million loan for a potential FBS transfer"

Interesting. I copied and pasted that title. The article title must have been updated recently.

"Editor’s Note: An earlier version of this story had a headline that stated the ASI loan was approved, that is not correct. The board passed a resolution to begin conversations for the loan, the error has since been corrected"

The latest in an interesting series of financial announcements from Sac State.
1- We have $50 million in NIL money and we’re going FBS soon
2 - We’re upgrading the Nest and building a new football stadium
3 - We’re facing a $33 million budget deficit
4 - We’re implementing $45 million in budget cuts
5 - We’re getting a $2.5 million loan from the student body so we can go FBS
6 - Actually we’re only in discussions with the student body about a loan

Is this what was once referred to as “voodoo economics “?

They have concepts of a plan

Sacramento State President Luke Wood revealed to The State Hornet that the school’s new multi-use stadium will be built in three phases and shared new information about Sac State’s potential move to the FBS

Wood said the first phase of construction on the stadium will begin this year, adding around $2.5 million in new amenities, but did not share what the estimated final cost of the stadium would be.

This information comes off the heels of Wood making several public statements about Sac State making the jump to the FBS, the highest subdivision in college football. Wood said that Sac State has spoken with three FBS conferences in the region and that a move will not happen in 2025.

Whole article here: https://statehornet.com/2025/01/sac-state-stadium-construction-plans-fbs-luke-wood/

Here are some excerpts from a Sacramento Bee opinion piece about the proposed new Sac State football stadium written by Tom Philp yesterday. The article is too long for me to copy and paste in its entirety. The author is of the opinion that Dr. Wood has made a lot of public comments about how fast things are happening in regards to the new stadium and Sac's move up to FBS with little to show for it so far. The author also is critical about how difficult it has been for the Bee to obtain factual information from the university concerning the actual plans, projected costs and funding for all the changes that Dr. Wood has said are currently underway in Sac State Athletics.

It is going to take about twice as long as planned for Sacramento State to get its first glimpse of what it may cost to build a gleaming new football stadium. The project’s first cost estimate, initially scheduled for completion in February, now won’t be done until this summer at the earliest.

Frankly, the university could use the time. It has been struggling ever since that initial September announcement to promptly provide some basic public information about where things stand with this ambitious project. The best chance for success is for Sac State to be an open book, particularly with the students who are paying a disproportionate share of the cost of university athletics.

University President Luke Wood had no cost estimate in hand when he confidently unveiled his plan to build a 25,000-seat stadium on the same site as the temporary facility that has been the football team’s home for decades. But he did set in motion a crucial analysis to get a better idea of what a stadium might cost and to assess local residents’ interest in watching Sacramento State football play some tougher competition in a truly modern facility.

That September announcement included plans to contract with a San Francisco-based architectural firm, Populous, “to create the conceptual design for the stadium.” To its credit, the university has provided The Bee with its $318,000 contract with Populous.

Other than releasing the Populous contract, every other attempt by The Bee for information about university athletics has been slow-walked by the university. Sacramento State has been committing its own version of “delay of game,” a football penalty when the offense doesn’t get the play off in time.

Wood is attempting to achieve something that has eluded all his predecessors: pooling public and private funds into the nine-figure sum needed to build a stadium suitable for the Sacramento State and for top-division football. This feat will not be easy. Yet belief in its prospects is diminished by Wood’s administration slow-walking any request for basic information about this project.

In hindsight, it’s now pretty clear that Wood did not have much research about costs and revenues when he confidently announced his plans to build this state-of-the-art football stadium last September. He’s now learning on the fly. It would be a coup for the region to climb into the higher echelons of this treasured college sport. But given how little we currently know, it’s simply too soon to tell.

Whole article here: https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/article297901063.html

7. We have Combat Sports and Martial Arts University – Combat U – is a first-of-its-kind program.
8. My brother is part of the local braintrust.

So who wants to bet against Dr. Wood?

Is it logical for Sac pro soccer and the Hornets to share a facility? Is FC Republic committed to the Railyards?

Been silently watching and reading this story with great interest.
It would be great to see both Causeway teams go FBS. However, it is just as likely that Sac loses football as it is to get to FBS. They have very limited options since neither of the West Coast conference seem at all interested. Seemingly, the Pac 12 and MW have both said no thanks to adding a financially challenged school with second rate facilities.
Dr. Wood may have started this with great, albeit naive, intentions. But at this point, he is dragging out this story as a means of portraying accomplishment and distracting from the major financial issues Sac State is facing.