It seems like a solid sports discussion IMO. I see it as pointing out good opportunities to get better, not as complaining.
Maybe it comes down to if people really believe Homecourt advantage matters in college basketball. There is a lot of data out there to show that it does indeed matter and it is statistically significant in college hoops even moreso than other sports.

So far, I have seen some examples given where JMU's one baseline student seating configuration matches others in the country like ODU and Richmond. I agree. But I am saying those are examples of the worst student seating configurations. So if JMU is building a $103 million Taj Mahal wouldn't we want to have the best student seating configuration to maximize homecourt advantage? Why would we elect to have the worst student seating configuration?

Easy Fix - release a new diagram that puts student seats on both baselines and let them in 30 minutes before the public. Then allow General admission tickets to sit in the endzones only if there are any remaining seats in the upper rows, otherwise up to the 2nd deck you go. Also take the first 5 rows of the sideline opposite the benches and dedicate that to student seating. This would leave the club section alone and it would still allow for courtside foldout chairs on the hardwood like many arenas have.
JMU can max out its premium seating dollars and also have student seating on 3 sides for maximum homecourt advantage.

Here are 2 recently built arenas at Auburn and Ole Miss that have 3 sides for student seating. What would be the reason that JMU could not and should not do this?