I don't necessarily think it would be a terrible decision for the park to go with a smaller coaster, though I am also rooting for something big. Prowler and Thunderhead were ranked as the #11 and #12 wood coasters in the world in Mitch Hawker's poll (the most popular and respected coaster poll for major coaster enthusiasts). Also, a big, record breaking, epic coaster might bring in crowds, but who would make up those crowds? SDC does well for themselves to focus on families. Teens and thrill seekers often do not appreciate the finer aspects of this park, do not spend money in-park, and tend not to mix as well with other visitors. As much as I love the big coasters, crowd targeting is always something to think about with a park like this. They really started screwing with the dynamics of the park when they added Wildfire... but that's an old discussion.
Anyway, I've been thinking and writing about this entirely too much lately, but here are some (hopefully) final thoughts of mine on the size of the project and investment. The newspaper must have worded it wrong, and $12 million is being spent on both projects. That's got to be it. There's no way SF Fiesta Texas is spending less than $10 million if they're doing a full I-Box rebuild of the Rattler, and there's no way SDC is spending less than $6 million at least on this coaster, conservatively. $12 million is a fair amount for a good sized wooden coaster, considering Prowler at WOF cost $8 million and this will use more steel and be built on tougher terrain. So it should be a good sized coaster, maybe a little larger than Prowler and Thunderhead, which again are currently just outside the top ten best wooden coasters in the world out of hundreds, and they both debuted IN the top ten.