calumnus said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

IMO Cal should reduce capacity of Haas, and reconfigure the arena for better fan experience and wider concourse. SMU's Moody coliseum is a good example of a practical remodel, capacity reduction, practice facility addition and modernization.

---

We should not reduce capacity but we should reconfigure to increase the size and position of the student section.

Many, many great historic college programs play in what amount to "oversized high school gyms" that have been expanded and modernized like Haas. Rather than spend $100 million on a new gym, throw $5 million a year at Mark Few. People will then rave about our "atmosphere."

A dedicated practice facility that players can access anytime is a legit need. One of the courts at RSF, Clark Kerr or Hearst or even just Haas itself should have been designated a long time ago. With the tearing down of Edwards Stadium, I hope we make plans for one.

---

We don't have the pedigree of someone who can get away with a Camden. Also, we're catering to Cal alums and Bay Area basketball fans. We don't need a fancy remodel, just some solid amenities and comfortable seating. We need a practical remodel.

Also, the problem with paying a Mark Few $5m is his current school can offer him that *and * better facilities. That said, I do think we should mean into the field house vibe.

ClayK said:

---

A lot of it is perception, of course, but the reality can be a problem.

First, even before COVID, BART was not always a pleasant ride. Homeless, crowding, etc., plus you could wait 20 minutes for a train after a game, plus another possible wait for a transfer train.

Second, the 10-minute walk is straight uphill, and for some people, that's 10 minutes of knee pain -- and downhill can be worse.

Third, I think the ability to find parking goes along with low attendance. A sold-out Haas, especially if the students aren't packing it, creates parking and traffic issues, especially if the weather is bad.

I grant you the restaurants are great, and the atmosphere is fun, but that means you get there around 5:30 for a 7 p.m. game which means you're battling traffic and a crowded BART.

A great team would likely overcome that, but I don't know that an average one, or even an above-average one, would create enough demand to overcome the hassles of Haas. That said, Haas is here to stay, so it would seem to me that every other facility at Cal needs to match the best in the Pac-12 to impress recruits.

---

Millions ride BART every year. BART trains are/were packed for A's, Warriors and Raiders' games. Even Giants' games even though you have to transfer to Muni. Just because you don't like BART does not mean that others do not.

However, as I said, if you don't like BART, street parking is free and easy. Again, we are talking about Haas, not Memorial. "Straight uphill"? The elevation gain from one side of the tennis courts/Edwards to the other and level with Evan's and Haas is maybe 10 feet? We get 10 times as many people walking all the way to Memorial Stadium for football. Haas is a fraction of the distance and elevation gain and can easily be handled by reasonsbly heathy adult. The walk from the parking lots at Levi's is at least as far. The walk up the stairs at the Coliseum is worse. Again, if you have mobility issues, there is handicap parking. I get it when people complain about CMS' location, access and parking, but Haas? Haas has fantastic access. It is a classic remodeled and expanded old college venue much like UCLA, Kansas, Duke...but with MUCH better public transit access, much better dining options. It is not our issue at all.

I mean, have you ever been to a game at St. Mary's? Talk about a high school gym. I'm sure that is why Bennett has had no success there.

calbears4ever said:

---

The knife cuts both ways. A smaller stadium is better able to compensate for falling attendance, but if a team starts getting good and people want to come to their games, bigger is better, especially if they make the playoffs. Tarping off some seats could work in some cases if attendance is predicted to be lacking, the Oakland A's did that a lot in the regular season

---

You say that is if it is a good thing. Not a good look, IMO.

Civil Bear said:

---

calbears4ever said:

---

The knife cuts both ways. A smaller stadium is better able to compensate for falling attendance, but if a team starts getting good and people want to come to their games, bigger is better, especially if they make the playoffs. Tarping off some seats could work in some cases if attendance is predicted to be lacking, the Oakland A's did that a lot in the regular season

---

You say that is if it is a good thing. Not a good look, IMO.

---

Yeah, there was a clear misunderstanding. I'm not suggesting we simply eliminate seats for the sake of having fewer people. I'm saying we reconfigure the space we have for comfort and improved amenities, which will likely result in fewer seats.

Not going to happen. The cheap seats above the chairbacks are full of season ticket holders. Most of the lower chairbacks are usually empty as they are owned by corporations or high rollers who rarely come. This has been discussed for years. They wont allow those not coming to turn their seats in so they could be resold. No idea why. Gone through multiple ad's . Most season ticket holders with high priority points who are not in the chairbacks sit low in the corners or behind the North basket.. not sure what they are doing with the South Basket area.

Students dont come so they lost court side seats. 1/3 is now for VIP's, families of players or friends of the coach, AD or of other university officials. Sometimes recruits and families sit there.mostly its empty, especially in preseason when everyone can be invited to sit there as well as in the student section during semester break(1/3 of the season ).The press was removed from first row above students and sold to mega donors . They have tried many promotions to get students in and none really works, except free food. Letting them in free has been refused, many times. Mike Montgomery offered to do a promotion and donate the money to student tickets. He was refused.

In my opinion this will only get worse as there are no creative decisions, no real desire to change anything. They play loud rapp music supposedly for the 12 students that are there while season ticket holders have to cover their ears.

calumnus said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

IMO Cal should reduce capacity of Haas, and reconfigure the arena for better fan experience and wider concourse. SMU's Moody coliseum is a good example of a practical remodel, capacity reduction, practice facility addition and modernization.

---

We should not reduce capacity but we should reconfigure to increase the size and position of the student section.

Many, many great historic college programs play in what amount to "oversized high school gyms" that have been expanded and modernized like Haas. Rather than spend $100 million on a new gym, throw $5 million a year at Mark Few. People will then rave about our "atmosphere."

A dedicated practice facility that players can access anytime is a legit need. One of the courts at RSF, Clark Kerr or Hearst or even just Haas itself should have been designated a long time ago. With the tearing down of Edwards Stadium, I hope we make plans for one.

---

We don't have the pedigree of someone who can get away with a Camden. Also, we're catering to Cal alums and Bay Area basketball fans. We don't need a fancy remodel, just some solid amenities and comfortable seating. We need a practical remodel.

Also, the problem with paying a Mark Few $5m is his current school can offer him that *and * better facilities. That said, I do think we should mean into the field house vibe.

---

I am definitely for a remodel/reconfiguration. I want a full student section lining the court like Harmon and I want the TV cameras on the other side facing them. Comfy seats for the alums sitting on the side with the TV cameras. The sections under the baskets should be "active cheering": student overflow and alums who want to stand up and make noise on occasion without getting yelled at. Good food, beer and wine should be easily and quickly available.

---

Yep. We can do this within the existing footprint. Upgraded concessions, seat reconfiguration, seat backs for all alumni seating etc.

calumnus said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

IMO Cal should reduce capacity of Haas, and reconfigure the arena for better fan experience and wider concourse. SMU's Moody coliseum is a good example of a practical remodel, capacity reduction, practice facility addition and modernization.

---

We should not reduce capacity but we should reconfigure to increase the size and position of the student section.

Many, many great historic college programs play in what amount to "oversized high school gyms" that have been expanded and modernized like Haas. Rather than spend $100 million on a new gym, throw $5 million a year at Mark Few. People will then rave about our "atmosphere."

A dedicated practice facility that players can access anytime is a legit need. One of the courts at RSF, Clark Kerr or Hearst or even just Haas itself should have been designated a long time ago. With the tearing down of Edwards Stadium, I hope we make plans for one.

---

After the remodel and the new scoreboard, I think Haas is fine as a basketball structure

However there are things we should do to improve the player and fan experience that don't cost $10M

Some examples:

A player lounge - if we have a player lounge, I haven't seen it. A lounge with all the modern amenities is a fraction of the cost of a Haas renovation or practice facility. A lead donor alum could attach their name to it. How about the "Jason Kidd Cal Basketball Lounge"

Moving the retired jersey's inside the arena - the wood panels are nice, and could be used to recognize star former players, but it's not fit for retired jerseys. I like the photos of the cal athletes now on the walls, but if we reorganize them we could clear up space for some new former player graphics.

Close the front lounge and repurpose the space - this was the worst change ever! It eliminated the Cal store which was a focal point before and after games, and people buying cal basketball gear and walking around campus and town is free marketing/branding. If they don't want to restore the store, they could convert the space to a permanent sales popup and restore the trophy case display. Right now, you walk into Haas and are welcomed by a wall

Restoring the student baseline benches - Removing the front lounge also means we can close off the two doors that lead to the lounge, and restore an uninterrupted student bench. It really killed the fun and energy for our students when they broke up the student seats for those doors.



Player promotions - - they've added some new branding and prior player graphics around the halls of Haas. That was a good start. More please! How nice would it be to have Bradley and Kelly's banner hanging outside of Haas?



Upgraded locker room - I think the current locker room is pretty good, but a few new flourishes and amenities could go a long way at a small cost. Could just be refurbishing some older cabinets or replacing some fixtures.

Throw in some fun - add a selfie station. Add a kids basketball game in one of the unused spaces for halftime, with some free cal trinkets for prizes, etc.

Plenty of other ideas also ...

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

An oversized dart board of Mike Williams' fat face, with prizes for the kids who puncture skin, wouldn't cost much more than $1,000 to put together. If you charge $1 a toss, it'd be profitable in no time.

---

OMG that's awful. That is ugly hate. I hope the mods take that down.

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

An oversized dart board of Mike Williams' fat face, with prizes for the kids who puncture skin, wouldn't cost much more than $1,000 to put together. If you charge $1 a toss, it'd be profitable in no time.

---

That is aberated, you should go get audited so you can get clear.

I think the comparison between basketball and football is misleading, as of course there are more people walking up the hill because four or five times more people are going to the game.

But the perception of fans is as important as the reality, and even before COVID, people were turning away from BART. And if you don't have a set routine, it can be a challenge to find parking. And finally, as long as we're in a drought, several blocks' walk in the winter is no big deal, but add in rain and wind?

As for St. Mary's, it is small but it's packed, and the Australian pipeline set the stage for the team's success. Bennett is an exceptional coach as well, but he's not recruiting against UCLA, and really, he's not even recruiting against Gonzaga. He's recruiting against LMU and Portland, so I don't think he's at the same facilities' disadvantage as Cal.

And finally, Haas is less important, I think, than player amenities because impressing recruits is far, far more important than fan experience.

calumnus said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

An oversized dart board of Mike Williams' fat face, with prizes for the kids who puncture skin, wouldn't cost much more than $1,000 to put together. If you charge $1 a toss, it'd be profitable in no time.

---

That is aberated, you should go get audited so you can get clear.

---

Calumnus,

Thank you for your concern. I do have an auditing appointment set up for this afternoon at 3pm, as I do every afternoon. Auditing has been a powerful tool in helping me identify and "visit" my previous lives. I am very thankful to be able to make these visits, because only in these previous lives did Cal have a winning basketball and football program. And, I am not a young thetan, if you know what I mean. LRH, help us.

I am afraid that Mike Williams and his incompetence is buried very, very deep in my time track and my reactive mind, and his energies occasionally exert a negative impact on my ability to live a free and caring life. It will take a significant move up the Bridge for me to be able to fully expel Mike Williams from my immortal soul.

Look, I don't claim to be an expert in any of this. I am only OTIII, and I have my share of flaws and weaknesses. I am pretty good at clearing a room, especially after eating Taco Bell. But clearing the planet is a whole different story and seems like a distant dream. I do strongly believe that Cal will not win a national championship in football or basketball until the planet is cleared, so I encourage all Cal fans to begin their journey up the Bridge.

Stanford Jonah said:

---

Big C said:

---

Agree. The practice facility needs to be our top priority, as it will also help to get more coaching candidates to take us seriously. I hope there is a plan to get a "simpler" one up and running, that we can add bells and whistles to down the road (unless we can do it all at one, which would be even better).

As we learned with CMS, facilities don't automatically help recruiting, but LOUSY facilities are surely a constraint.

I use the term "our top priority" like I'm going to help get the project off the ground, but the best I can do is one season ticket. I'm hoping that other friends of California Basketball can make this happen. Soon.

---

2000's: The SAHPC will solve our football program's problems!
2020's: Whoops

1990's: Upgrading Harmon Gym will solve our basketball program's problems!
2000's: Whoops

2020: Building a practice facility and building an actually nice basketball arena will solve our basketball program's problems!

2030: Whoops

Winning solves your program's problems. Win first, get people interested, then upgrade the facilities when you've got momentum on your side.

Any athletic program that wants to be good needs to do these things in order.

1. Get a good athletic director. We do not have one at the present time, nor any interest in replacing the inadequate one we have.

2. Athletic director hires good football and men's basketball head coaches. We do not have either at this point in time.

3. Athletic director makes sure those programs can afford to hire good assistants who can RECRUIT.

4. Once your programs start getting better due to competent management, then you upgrade your facilities, which people are more apt to help you with because they can see that there's something worth investing in.

---

a. agree about the athletic director part

b. said athletic director would have to make a damn insightful hire, identifying and luring the right up-and-comer, because not too many coaches are interested in the Cal job, as a place where they think they could win

c. a lot of people close to Cal Football are very optimistic about the Wilcox Program right now, despite the COVID season

Big C said:

---

Stanford Jonah said:

---

Big C said:

---

Agree. The practice facility needs to be our top priority, as it will also help to get more coaching candidates to take us seriously. I hope there is a plan to get a "simpler" one up and running, that we can add bells and whistles to down the road (unless we can do it all at one, which would be even better).

As we learned with CMS, facilities don't automatically help recruiting, but LOUSY facilities are surely a constraint.

I use the term "our top priority" like I'm going to help get the project off the ground, but the best I can do is one season ticket. I'm hoping that other friends of California Basketball can make this happen. Soon.

---

2000's: The SAHPC will solve our football program's problems!
2020's: Whoops

1990's: Upgrading Harmon Gym will solve our basketball program's problems!
2000's: Whoops

2020: Building a practice facility and building an actually nice basketball arena will solve our basketball program's problems!

2030: Whoops

Winning solves your program's problems. Win first, get people interested, then upgrade the facilities when you've got momentum on your side.

Any athletic program that wants to be good needs to do these things in order.

1. Get a good athletic director. We do not have one at the present time, nor any interest in replacing the inadequate one we have.

2. Athletic director hires good football and men's basketball head coaches. We do not have either at this point in time.

3. Athletic director makes sure those programs can afford to hire good assistants who can RECRUIT.

4. Once your programs start getting better due to competent management, then you upgrade your facilities, which people are more apt to help you with because they can see that there's something worth investing in.

---

a. agree about the athletic director part

b. said athletic director would have to make a damn insightful hire, identifying and luring the right up-and-comer, because not too many coaches are interested in the Cal job, as a place where they think they could win

c. a lot of people close to Cal Football are very optimistic about the Wilcox Program right now, despite the COVID season

---

I have been a Baldwin critic and (largely as a result) a Wilcox skeptic. However, offensive recruiting has made a major leap. If Musgrave can deliver a good offense this year and Wilcox and Sirmon can maintain a good defense then the upward momentum will be clear.

A rising football program lifts all boats. This time next year hopefully our financial outlook from football allows us to make any necessary changes in basketball.

If there is a search, I think it is important that donors push for a committee of qualified Cal basketball alumni to handle it rather than Knowlton.

calumnus said:

---

Big C said:

---

Stanford Jonah said:

---

Big C said:

---

Agree. The practice facility needs to be our top priority, as it will also help to get more coaching candidates to take us seriously. I hope there is a plan to get a "simpler" one up and running, that we can add bells and whistles to down the road (unless we can do it all at one, which would be even better).

As we learned with CMS, facilities don't automatically help recruiting, but LOUSY facilities are surely a constraint.

I use the term "our top priority" like I'm going to help get the project off the ground, but the best I can do is one season ticket. I'm hoping that other friends of California Basketball can make this happen. Soon.

---

2000's: The SAHPC will solve our football program's problems!
2020's: Whoops

1990's: Upgrading Harmon Gym will solve our basketball program's problems!
2000's: Whoops

2020: Building a practice facility and building an actually nice basketball arena will solve our basketball program's problems!

2030: Whoops

Winning solves your program's problems. Win first, get people interested, then upgrade the facilities when you've got momentum on your side.

Any athletic program that wants to be good needs to do these things in order.

1. Get a good athletic director. We do not have one at the present time, nor any interest in replacing the inadequate one we have.

2. Athletic director hires good football and men's basketball head coaches. We do not have either at this point in time.

3. Athletic director makes sure those programs can afford to hire good assistants who can RECRUIT.

4. Once your programs start getting better due to competent management, then you upgrade your facilities, which people are more apt to help you with because they can see that there's something worth investing in.

---

a. agree about the athletic director part

b. said athletic director would have to make a damn insightful hire, identifying and luring the right up-and-comer, because not too many coaches are interested in the Cal job, as a place where they think they could win

c. a lot of people close to Cal Football are very optimistic about the Wilcox Program right now, despite the COVID season

---

I have been a Baldwin critic and (largely as a result) a Wilcox skeptic. However, offensive recruiting has made a major leap. If Musgrave can deliver a good offense this year and Wilcox and Sirmon can maintain a good defense then the upward momentum will be clear.

A rising football program lifts all boats. This time next year hopefully our financial outlook from football allows us to make any necessary changes in basketball.

If there is a search, I think it is important that donors push for a committee of qualified Cal basketball alumni to handle it rather than Knowlton.

---

I am not sure why you think this.

USC has had a good football program since essentially forever and yet most of the time the USC basketball program has sucked.

Conversely, U of A has never been to a Rose Bowl, but they've won a NCAA Basketball Title and went to the Final Four three other times.

I am not really sure how the programs relate to each other.

Duke, UK, Kansas, UNC... all have pretty crappy football programs.

So how do they fund their basketball programs?

Obviously there's more to it than facilities, but I do think a teenager is going to look hard at the practice facility, the weight room, injury treatment options, the player lounge and the general atmosphere for athletes. And then compare those with the other schools recruiting him.

The actual playing facility is of less importance, especially if it's full most of the time.

P5 athletes live in a bubble, for the most part, as the demands on their time and attention are significant, and the more comfortable and welcoming the bubble, the more attractive the school is.

I remember asking a P5 women's basketball player about how she liked her school and she said "I don't really know -- I only go to class, my dorm and practice."

And of course this isn't lost on prospective coaches. It's hard enough to win at the P5 level without having to overcome an unnecessary challenge, which it seems to me is the whole facility issue at Cal.

Fox was not the right guy to coach the basketball team at all. If anything, it was Knowlton's worst mistake of his tenure as AD, and he needs to be held accountable for it. However, I do think that he made the right call to hire Smith as WBB coach and Crosson for volleyball, and even though both programs had a down year this year due to injures and transfers out (Styles for WBB, Anderson and Forte for VB), they are poised for a good 2021 season if everyone stays healthy. Plus Cal VB will have Mirkovic and Smoot (who opted out this season to play beach) back in the fall, which will almost certainly help the VB team and maybe get them back to the NCAA's for the first time since 2013

stu said:

---

ClayK said:

---

... Second, the 10-minute walk is straight uphill, and for some people, that's 10 minutes of knee pain -- and downhill can be worse ...

---

I see tens of thousands trudging up a much longer and steeper hill to Memorial Stadium. Perhaps a free shuttle could help those in need.

I'm lucky. I'm in my seventies and have had 6 arthroscopic knee surgeries but I can still walk to Hass from BART. Specifically MacArthur BART. But not after dark.

---

Parking isn't any worse than for Bruin Basketball

Cal me at 5 pm for a 7 pm game. Meters expire at 6 in many places. Workers at Cal are just leaving. Inusually park near center or on Durant.

NathanAllen said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Big C said:

---

Stanford Jonah said:

---

Big C said:

---

Agree. The practice facility needs to be our top priority, as it will also help to get more coaching candidates to take us seriously. I hope there is a plan to get a "simpler" one up and running, that we can add bells and whistles to down the road (unless we can do it all at one, which would be even better).

As we learned with CMS, facilities don't automatically help recruiting, but LOUSY facilities are surely a constraint.

I use the term "our top priority" like I'm going to help get the project off the ground, but the best I can do is one season ticket. I'm hoping that other friends of California Basketball can make this happen. Soon.

---

2000's: The SAHPC will solve our football program's problems!
2020's: Whoops

1990's: Upgrading Harmon Gym will solve our basketball program's problems!
2000's: Whoops

2020: Building a practice facility and building an actually nice basketball arena will solve our basketball program's problems!

2030: Whoops

Winning solves your program's problems. Win first, get people interested, then upgrade the facilities when you've got momentum on your side.

Any athletic program that wants to be good needs to do these things in order.

1. Get a good athletic director. We do not have one at the present time, nor any interest in replacing the inadequate one we have.

2. Athletic director hires good football and men's basketball head coaches. We do not have either at this point in time.

3. Athletic director makes sure those programs can afford to hire good assistants who can RECRUIT.

4. Once your programs start getting better due to competent management, then you upgrade your facilities, which people are more apt to help you with because they can see that there's something worth investing in.

---

a. agree about the athletic director part

b. said athletic director would have to make a damn insightful hire, identifying and luring the right up-and-comer, because not too many coaches are interested in the Cal job, as a place where they think they could win

c. a lot of people close to Cal Football are very optimistic about the Wilcox Program right now, despite the COVID season

---

I have been a Baldwin critic and (largely as a result) a Wilcox skeptic. However, offensive recruiting has made a major leap. If Musgrave can deliver a good offense this year and Wilcox and Sirmon can maintain a good defense then the upward momentum will be clear.

A rising football program lifts all boats. This time next year hopefully our financial outlook from football allows us to make any necessary changes in basketball.

If there is a search, I think it is important that donors push for a committee of qualified Cal basketball alumni to handle it rather than Knowlton.

---

I am not sure why you think this.

USC has had a good football program since essentially forever and yet most of the time the USC basketball program has sucked.

Conversely, U of A has never been to a Rose Bowl, but they've won a NCAA Basketball Title and went to the Final Four three other times.

I am not really sure how the programs relate to each other.

Duke, UK, Kansas, UNC... all have pretty crappy football programs.

So how do they fund their basketball programs?

---

The budgets of athletics departments are all in one pot. What the original poster probably meant is a PROSPEROUS football program lifts all boats.

Obviously, as you pointed out, that doesn't mean a hoops program's spending/budget is directly impacted by what the football program and other sports do. Duke (as you pointed out) is a good example. Duke spent $22M on hoops last year. Kentucky spent $20M but neither have hugely successful football programs.

But to the original poster's point, it's all connected.

---

Thanks, yes. It is all about the money. We paid Wyking $millions to hire Fox and pay him more $millions. We would have to pay Fox $millions to hire someone new and pay them more $millions. This at a time when COVID-19 cost the AD a year of ticket sales with almost no reduction in costs.

Moreover, the football team has had the worst offense in the conference, one of the worst in the country for the last 4 years. Wilcox has yet to have a winning season in conference despite the PAC-12 being in a down period. He remains popular among Cal fans, but a 5th year with a losing conference record and three wins against OOC patsies might make fans restless.

We really need Wilcox to achieve a lot more this Fall, starting with winning more games in conference rather than losing. If he can do that we will know the major cash cow is fine or at least the future looks good and we can afford to lay out the capital to fix the minor cash cow. Unless a major donor wants to step up. There is always that possibility.