I hope we build up, not back, so you feel closer to the action. Better acoustics too?

...and some added shade in August/September

Yes to both.

...and some added shade in August/September — AggieFinn

Shade, in any form, is absolutely critical and should be right up there with the top priorities. We all know that Aggie Stadium is an oven when the weather is hot and most of us have experienced how uncomfortable it can be. Aggie fans chase every bit of shade they can find including crowding together in the shadow of the scoreboard.

I can't even imagine how miserable it must be for the students sitting on the east side before the sun sets. Not only are they getting broiled but the sun is directly in their eyes. I'm not sure what can be done to help shade the east side though. Perhaps a second deck on the west side would help.

There needs to be more shade structures and trees outside the stadium also so fans can find shaded areas to tailgate.

Why can’t we just schedule night games for august and September? I think we have started to do this. A lot cheaper than some have proposed.

we’ve been playing at night in September for several years. Even then, thst setting sun at 6:45 can be tough on the east bleachers. Same big it’s a warm 4:00 October kickoff

7:30 start time possible? I doubt the kids would mind that much.

Alabama state is exactly what I expect UC Davis health stadium to look like after renovations except Davis will have press boxes on the home side.

Doesn't seem like we would be able to add more seating on top of the box seating area we are building. The additional seating to get to 30,000 I believe what is needed for FCS level would likely come from putting seats in one of the grassy berm areas. Not sure if that gets us there or not. If we need more not sure if they would use the other grassy berm or go up on the visitor side. Seems like we would be more like the Salukis photos or if we go up on the visitor side then might look like the Utah St photos.

I’m pretty sure there is no longer an attendance minimum requirement anymore. .

no longer an attendance or seating minimum from the NCAA. The Mountain West may have their own internal parameters though. I think an Aggie stadium with a berm filled and some addition seating to get to 18-20k would be a good size for our types of attendance, price and overall feel of the stadium in addition to the new suites area

We just hired a former Lehigh football player at work and he steered me wrong with the 30K minimum!! I know our original long-term designs allowed for up to 30,000 seats to be built. Looks like there was 15,000 seat minimum for FBS schools but it was eliminated in 2023, so you are right Dr. Mike. I googled Mountain West and they have no strict policy but at roughly 11,000 seats we would be the lowest. My guess is the grassy area is not counted in the 11,000, so we can hold more than that.

UNLV - 65,000
UTEP - 52,000
Air Force - 39,000
New Mexico - 39,000
Wyoming - 31,000
Nevada - 27,000
Northern Illinois - 24,000
San Jose St - 22,000
North Dakota St - 19,000
Hawaii - 17,000 - new stadium underway for 23,000 (year 2029!!). A prior stadium held 50,000

When we move to FBS I see our capacity at 22k with one grass berm in front of expanded video board, then later add additional suites/premium seats next to and above bob foster team center. This will leave us space to expand to 25k in future if ever necessary by filling in other grass berm. 30k will never happen and isn’t necessary in modern college football in CA. 22-25k with more luxury/premium seats is the way to go!

interesting that both Reno and San Jose reduced capacity after renovating. Reno hasn’t been getting close to filling that for awhile.



Some fairly empty stadiums in the new MWC.

This is why an aggie stadium maxed at say 18k-20k would just make more sense. Focus on innovative bar seating and suites rather than thousands of extra bleacher seats beyond whats needed. I was surprised how many more people attend MW games on average compared to Big Sky games. Even in our current stadium at the FCS level we averaged 12,991 (basically 13k) per game last season which is comparable to some of the bottom of the HW.

Here at the averages for Big Sky schools last year for comparison (which outside of the top SHOCKED me):

University of Montana ~26,464 fans per game
Montana State University ~21,877 fans per game
Sac State ~15,468
UC Davis ~12,991 fans per game
University of Idaho ~9,970 fans per game
Northern Arizona University ~8,990 fans per game
Idaho State University ~7,550 fans per game
Eastern Washington University ~5,450 fans per game
Weber State University ~4,070 fans per game
Portland State University ~3,580 fans per game
University of Northern Colorado ~3,820 fans per game

So, by this graphic we're already maybe 8th or 9th for attendance in the 10 team MWC...with potential to get that up to maybe No. 5 or No. 6.

Look at Air Force, great attendance

Air Force hosting Army, Boise, and Wyo surely helped boost their numbers. Personally, I don't see Davis ever being much more than a 15k attendance program at best unless some things change drastically. I agree with playing as many night games as possible, but TV will dictate that in the FBS, which probably works in favor of the Ags playing more night games. Not a whole lot that can be done for shade aside from the kickoff time, that place is like sitting in frying pan at times.

“ Reno hasn’t been getting close to filling that for awhile.”

Dang, remember when we were all there for a game with the wolfpack? The place was packed. Near impossible to get a cab. We started walking back to the hotel before we could finally flag down a cab.

Would going to natural turf help with the stadium temperature?

Only for the players/coaches/support staff on the field, and it would potentially cool things by 10-20 degrees down there depending on the conditions. I've often sat in the tanning bed, I mean stadium bleachers, wondering why the premier ag school in the state can't maintain a Rose Bowl-esque hybrid Bermuda natural playing surface that holds up beautifully for football and women's LAX usage. I've sipped beer on the Biggs practice field in December wondering why it can be maintained there and not in the stadium. Check the research, ACL and foot injuries are MUCH higher on these FieldTurf/synthetic surfaces than on natural grass. And don't give me the "water savings" line... Make Natural Grass the Norm Again

Ahhhh......the perfectly manicured Toomey Field grass (early in the season when it wasn't raining). I miss the smell!

So we do the west side improvements for shade for the patrons, but nought for the players? I say we do both, grass and shade. I really do agree if UC Davis can’t grow a healthy turf football field who the hell can?
One question. Do any D1 football teams play on natural turf now?

quite a few big programs especially in the south. The new San Diego state stadium apparently has grass as uses USD. I suspect it’s a matter of maintaining it.

+Stanford, UCLA, ASU. Most of the SEC. Even Texas is flipping back to grass for player safety. Penn State, Michigan State, Purdue and the new Northwestern stadium. Very few G6 due to cost.

oddly, USD has grass as we’ll see in September! Hopefully at night this year - the past couple 1:00 kickoffs were brutal.

Nothing better!

Plenty of FBS grass fields. Davis is blessed with separate soccer and track & field facilities and only shares with women's lacrosse, correct? That is really easy on the grass, but you would basically lose the stadium as a practice venue in around October or so when it starts getting damp. Is Biggs large enough to actually practice there every day? I am all for it if they can figure out the logistics.

Natural grass is much better. I don't see how anyone is allowed to have turf with the injuries it must cause vs grass. I also don't think those black rubber pellets are safe, in case anyone gets some in their mouth, like our poor dog that picks up the tees. All the extra concussions as helmets get slammed to the ground that is harder than turf. The extra infections as cuts are exposed to a dirtier turf vs grass.

My daughter played soccer for years and the turf fields radiated heat on hot days that could be felt by the parents even on the sidelines, so turf has to be much hotter than grass. I believe Messi avoids playing any games on turf as it causes more injuries.

I toured the Green Bay Packer stadium once and they showed us that they have some kind of hybrid artificial turf and natural grass. That always sounded interesting to me to try and get the benefits of both.

I had never heard that about Lambeau or of a similar product existing. I was on the sideline there in pre-game for a Packers-Bears game back in the early-90s and it was just frozen tundra. Some of the hybrid Bermuda surfaces go dormant late in the season (that's why they look yellow on TV) but I haven't noticed that in recent years. Davis could have a similar surface to the Rose Bowl, almost like a putting green.

The radiant heat is enough to ban those artificial surfaces from the planet. The get very hard with age, the infill needs to be groomed and eventually replaced, the injury rates are significantly higher, and obviously the harder the field the greater the risk for concussions. Plus they smell bad. Nothing better than a fresh-cut grass field. What's an extra $75k per year in water costs?!

, @Pacifico2 I had not heard of hybrid turf before but I looked it up and it is a thing. It’s real grass with about 5% reinforcing fibers sewn in after. In my area we use Bermuda grass for fields, typically Tifway, Latitude, or Celebration. We overseed with annual rye so you still have the lateral strength of the Bermuda but the winter rye grows though for color. When artificial fields came into vogue 25 years ago the argument was lower maintenance and better for the environment. As for maintenance, you trade mowing and striping for raking, blowing, and sewing repairs. For the environment, they didn’t really mention that an artificial fields have a finite number of reps before they must be replaced in whole. I think UCDHS is on its 3rd turf. So water and fertilizer/pest control vs a giant non-recyclable pile of plastic every few years. In severe weather natural turf has the advantage in the heat, artificial turf in late season rain. The artificial turf companies don’t tell you that the pellets get everywhere and may be carcinogenic or that vomit, Gatorade etc are difficult to clean up. I prefer natural turf but I understand the optics of water conservation are a weighty factor in CA.