|
Post by k5james on Dec 21, 2012 11:09:29 GMT -8
We were 8-5 last year. I don't see how you can't see progression in this team. I stand corrected. We were 9-4 in 2010. I predicted a couple months ago that if we won at Boise and then finished the season with a bowl game victory that next year, attendance would again be around 40K per game as it was in 2010. I'll now say it will be several thousand less than that. Around 37K because this bowl game loss is going to hurt season ticket sales. Do you disagree with that too? I'm sure it could. I don't even know anymore with our fan base. I though there would be at least 40k for this game...
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Dec 21, 2012 11:17:35 GMT -8
Both of our big programs have a LOT of work to do. Hopefully our basketball program does some this year. But the hoops program continues to progress. For football, this was a good year. However, other than the win at Boise, there was no progression over last year since both included nine wins and both ended with disappointing performances in a nationally televised game. You are generally correct, but a bit too harsh on our FB program in this latest post. Surely the win at Nevada means something. I think most of us considered that gamed a probable loss. The seven straight wins, most in since the '70s, are significant. The fact that, with the exception of last night (a big one), the team got better as the season wore on is very significant. The first time we've had three bowl games in a row, ever, and the first time we have had three winning seasons in a row since Claude Gilbert's regime should not be discounted. Keep in mind that we lost Muema in the third quarter. That hurt us a lot. Finally, perhaps Adam Dingwell's lack of experience finally caught up with him. Yes, it was a very, very bad loss. Had we even scored one more TD late, making the final score 23-13, it would not have looked so bad. But that did not happen. A very bad end to what was actually a very good season. Let's not hunt for reasons to diminish that fact. AzWm
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Dec 21, 2012 11:17:57 GMT -8
Last night's game was the only football game on TV- there was no NFL Thursday game on. So if you wanted to watch a football , we were it. The score was 6-3 at the end of 3 quarters so unless you love defensive football , you might have taken a break , or if you were a recruit thinking of looking at the two schools. Maybe a recruit likes our defense , sees that he could come in and play. DB we need two.An OL sees an opportunity to replace a couple of guys leaving. RB , we need someone to share the load. QB also. No we are not in the major eye of the public , but last night we were the only football show. Did not help the announcers kept saying they thought SDSU would be in the BE next year , then the way things are going you never know. They did say the program was the best it has been in years.
|
|
|
Post by zurac315 on Dec 21, 2012 13:28:40 GMT -8
The nation doesn't view SDSU as anything. We don't even register on a national level. Wrong. Big article in the Boston Globe today. "Aztecs Fall Apart in Poinsettia Bowl." That is the one headline seen by readers of the Globe about Aztec football this year. We do register, just not positively.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Dec 21, 2012 13:36:35 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by cpeedlimit on Dec 21, 2012 13:38:50 GMT -8
What is the significance of the 9-4 season?
|
|
|
Post by junior on Dec 21, 2012 13:45:17 GMT -8
And when thousands of sports fans across the country see or hear it, their reaction is "typical San Diego State." I can guarantee that thousands of sports fans across the country don't even take note of it. I can hardly even remember who played in the Las Vegas Bowel or in that one in New Mexico. The scores? Did the winner/loser matter to me? Not a bit. And I promise it's that way for the rest of the nation. Nobody but a few thousand of us really care that BYWho beat the Aztecs again.
|
|
|
Post by zurac315 on Dec 21, 2012 13:55:24 GMT -8
Sitting at home right now looking directly at page C8 of the sports section. "BYU Capitalizes on Turnovers" "Aztecs Fall Apart in Pointsettia Bowl" Linebacker Kyle Van Noy....... I'm reading that Boston Globe. It's the only Boston Globe I know of.
|
|
|
Post by fanhood on Dec 21, 2012 14:40:14 GMT -8
I agree SGF. Thank god we are a basketball school.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Dec 21, 2012 15:03:48 GMT -8
Sitting at home right now looking directly at page C8 of the sports section. "BYU Capitalizes on Turnovers" "Aztecs Fall Apart in Pointsettia Bowl" Linebacker Kyle Van Noy....... I'm reading that Boston Globe. It's the only Boston Globe I know of. So, you read an actual paper newspaper! How retro of you. ;D AzWm
|
|
|
Post by Fishn'Aztec on Dec 21, 2012 16:21:53 GMT -8
Can we pass on the cr@ppy Bowl games and just petition for the 15 extra practices as a Bowl eligible team? Rocky is only interested in the practice time & the results like last night are embarassing not to mention the lack of fans in creaky old Qualcomm! GO AZTECS!
|
|
|
Post by retiredaztec on Dec 21, 2012 18:10:52 GMT -8
Those who say it doesn't matter are fooling themselves. It's sad and if Rocky Long actually sees bowl games as little more than party time for the players, that's really, really bad IMO. As I recall, I was doing my graduate work at UCLA when Terry Donahue was literally a last minute hire following the abrupt departure of Dick Vermeil. As I also recall Donahue's team had a 9-1-1 regular season record so the team's reward was to party at their bowl game. As a result they were bitch-slapped by Alabama at the Liberty Bowl and Donahue publicly stated, regarding bowl games, he would never make that mistake again. As I also recall, he ended up winning twice as many bowl games as he lost while at UCLA. Anything's possible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2012 18:11:21 GMT -8
Those who say it doesn't matter are fooling themselves. How many other SDSU games were televised on ESPN's main network this year or on the main network of the other TV sports networks for that matter? Answer: none. How many other SDSU games were significant enough that somebody paid for a blimp to hover over the stadium? Answer: none. Chuck Long was wrong about most things during his tenure at SDSU but a couple years into his tenure he was 100% correct about our national reputation. Chuck basically said then that SDSU desperately needed a big win during a game that the nation would see as changing its decades long underachievement. Chuck called that a "statement" win. The two guys sitting behind us said what I thought were a lot of dumb things during the game but one thing they said as the game began was entirely accurate. That is, the Poinsettia Bowl BYU Cougars had as a bad a QB and tailback combination as any BYU team the Aztecs had ever played. That fact gave us a chance to jump on them and just beat them into submission on a national stage. When we scored a TD on the tipped INT midway through the second quarter to bring us what appeared would be a 13-0 lead and all the momentum, I thought we might just do that. That elation lasted all of about one minute, until we were called for a block below the knees on the return. Then two plays later were called for holding . . . then Dingwell was sacked . . . then we were so far away from BYU's goal line we couldn't even attempt a FG on fourth down. Then came the second half. Maybe a beatdown of BYU under the circumstances wouldn't have risen to being a STATEMENT win. However, we at least could have debated that issue. Instead there's no debate today the nation continues to view SDSU football as a program which just can't get over the hump. It's sad and if Rocky Long actually sees bowl games as little more than party time for the players, that's really, really bad IMO. I'm not fooling myself SGF, but thanks for giving us your opinion on it. I agree with you that the game last night was the only game on TV. I agree that for probably all of 12 hours folks who are really really interested in college football and those who gamble on college football were interested in watching that game. And I agree with you that SDSU needs a 'statement' win. Other than that we don't agree on much... overall, James is correct - no one but Aztec fans (and former Aztec fans) gave a $hit about that game in a real sense. As far as football and national attention goes SDSU doesn't even register and a win over BYU would have made little to no impression on the national audience... even if the Aztecs had won 50 - 0. BYU had a down year this year and playing them was a lose/lose proposition. (BYU was one of two teams I did not want the Aztec's to play in a bowl game this year.) Again, I am only talking about those around the nation, not Aztec fans. No, to Aztec fans this was their opportunity to finally beat 'hated' BYU... it was going to make all of us diehards feel like we finally arrived or something. However, the truth of the matter is no one other than Aztec fans (or former fans) really cared. Hell, BYU didn't even care... they sent like 12 people to watch the damn game. I will note, in a subsequent post, you mentioned that you think the loss will damage next year's season ticket sales... I do agree with that - it might have gotten some of the former fans to buy. How much damage that game did I don't know --- some no doubt. So I am comfortable that I am not fooling myself at all about how important that game really was...
|
|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Dec 21, 2012 19:33:45 GMT -8
Maybe so, but it sure sucks to log in to SI.com this morning and one of the "Top Headlines" references BYU defense "smothers" SDSU. sportsillustrated.cnn.com/Thank you. Maybe the Poinsettia Bowl result is completely forgotten within 24 hours but at least for that 24-hour period, it's reported on most updates on these types of internet sites and sportstalk radio. And when thousands of sports fans across the country see or hear it, they're reaction is "typical San Diego State." I don't know about that SGF, here at work today, many had watched the game and essentially parroted the fair line that our team, esp our D looked great for three quarters and the game, although low scoring was interesting. They did give me a hard time about the 4th quarter turnover fest though and didn't mention the critical bad calls until I did. Essentially, they generally thought our team looked good but just fell apart in the last quarter. I don't think, at least here, there is any real cognizance of the concept of "typical San Diego State" other than the reputation of having a productive offense and porous defense. Something we haven't seen in years!
|
|
|
Post by podpeople on Dec 21, 2012 19:45:27 GMT -8
the consensus throughout the game was that SDSU "dominated" the first three quarters, but, because of the lack of imaginative play calling, we lost. That is that. Our OC put us in that position. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either being contentious, or is so egocentric that they have to postulate for the sake of doing so.
|
|
|
Post by wolfstartec on Dec 21, 2012 20:05:02 GMT -8
The nation doesn't view SDSU as anything. We don't even register on a national level. football doesn't Aztec basketball > football on a national presence.
|
|
|
Post by k5james on Dec 21, 2012 20:29:16 GMT -8
The nation doesn't view SDSU as anything. We don't even register on a national level. Wrong. Big article in the Boston Globe today. "Aztecs Fall Apart in Poinsettia Bowl." That is the one headline seen by readers of the Globe about Aztec football this year. We do register, just not positively. Page six of the sports section of the Boston Globe...that's big time...
|
|
|
Post by k5james on Dec 21, 2012 20:31:08 GMT -8
the consensus throughout the game was that SDSU "dominated" the first three quarters, but, because of the lack of imaginative play calling, we lost. That is that. Our OC put us in that position. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either being contentious, or is so egocentric that they have to postulate for the sake of doing so. Or has a different perspective on the gameplan.
|
|
|
Post by podpeople on Dec 21, 2012 20:35:54 GMT -8
the consensus throughout the game was that SDSU "dominated" the first three quarters, but, because of the lack of imaginative play calling, we lost. That is that. Our OC put us in that position. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either being contentious, or is so egocentric that they have to postulate for the sake of doing so. Or has a different perspective on the gameplan. speaking of egocentric... hey, Zuma. I should now Congratulate you on being as predictable as Ludwig's Play calling last night.
|
|
|
Post by k5james on Dec 21, 2012 20:36:02 GMT -8
Or has a different perspective on the gameplan. This team made all its bank this year off the "run first, pass rarely" mentality. This is often a winning formula, and had we stuck with it I think we'd have won last night. Agreed, some people have a hard time understanding that line of thinking though...
|
|