Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 8:36:17 GMT -8
JYP and MOW, the real reason people stay away from Aztec athletics and certainly this board.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 8:40:21 GMT -8
John, I was under the impression he attempted to make changes that might've improved the football program. Does he get any props for that at all? It's not like SDSU is in a position to dictate terms to leagues or TV people. Not sure the expectations put on Sterk are realistic. I would like to hear concrete specifics on ow we make things better instead of all the vague talk being thrown around here. You made a good suggestion about establishing a foundation to allow underprivileged kids to attend SDSU football games. But shouldn't that be something THE ADMINISTRATION initiates? I would contribute to such a fund but living in L.A. and being self employed, I sure as hell can't be active in running such a thing. Since you've brought up attendance, I'll repeat what I said once before about Rocky Long. Contrary to most here, I'm neither a Rocky lover or a Rocky hater. I see a lot of good the man has done but one thing which is inarguable about him is he brings absolutely no pizzazz to the program. You want concrete specifics? Nothing is more concrete and specific than that football attendance increased dramatically when Lugie and Hoke were at the helm of the team and fell off once they weren't around any more. So I'm convinced that one criterion for a replacement for Rocky is that another guy with a big personality should be hired.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 8:48:38 GMT -8
John, I was under the impression he attempted to make changes that might've improved the football program. Does he get any props for that at all? It's not like SDSU is in a position to dictate terms to leagues or TV people. Not sure the expectations put on Sterk are realistic. I would like to hear concrete specifics on ow we make things better instead of all the vague talk being thrown around here. You made a good suggestion about establishing a foundation to allow underprivileged kids to attend SDSU football games. But shouldn't that be something THE ADMINISTRATION initiates? I would contribute to such a fund but living in L.A. and being self employed, I sure as hell can't be active in running such a thing. Since you've brought up attendance, I'll repeat what I said once before about Rocky Long. Contrary to most here, I'm neither a Rocky lover or a Rocky hater. I see a lot of good the man has done but one thing which is inarguable about him is he brings absolutely no pizzazz to the program. You want concrete specifics? Nothing is more concrete and specific than that football attendance increased dramatically when Lugie and Hoke were at the helm of the team and fell off once they weren't around any more. So I'm convinced that one criterion for a replacement for Rocky is that another guy with a big personality should be hired. Tend to agree with you SGF when it comes to Rocky and his demeanor. However I would rather have fans show because they believe we will win as opposed to thinking the coach is awesome. With Hoke we got both and were lucky to have him. Until Rocky can't win and get us in a bowl he deserves our support considering how bad things have been on the Mesa. Honestly he strikes me as the type to step down anyway when he knows someone else can come in and do a better job. Until that day comes I will continue to support my Aztecs and buy season tickets. Also, I think winning 2 road games against P5 schools early in the year could go a longway I terms of boosting attendance In a bad home schedule year and further raising our profile. Let's see if Rocky and the boys are up to it this year and save the hand wringing for after the results.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Apr 18, 2014 8:49:11 GMT -8
JYP and MOW, the real reason people stay away from Aztec athletics and certainly this board. And yet, here you are. Did you arrive to make comments about the program? Or simply to throw spears at those who are making observations. Either way, welcome.
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Apr 18, 2014 9:15:29 GMT -8
Yes, it is incumbent upon the leaders---such as they are. It did not take us many years to climb out of the self-inflicted wounds. Hoke did it in two. Rocky has managed to bring some "stability", but lost the luster that Hoke created. The program is now drifting again upon a sea of apathy. I think you're talking more about wins and losses than structural issues in the school and its athletic department. You can see that winning eight or nine games doesn't draw flies unless they come against the right eight or nine teams. There was a spike in interest when Hoke got here but sooner or later people would have gotten used to his blustery rhetoric. Sooner or later you've gotta beat a name team and Hoke's record in this regard is no better than Rocky's. Rocky's results haven't been much different than Hoke's were or would have been. Both of them pile up their victories against the Little Sisters of the Poor; neither seems able to win a game he isn't supposed to. To be Fair, Rocky has beaten Boise twice, WSU once. So actually he has done better than Hoke.
|
|
|
Post by RockNFish on Apr 18, 2014 9:18:59 GMT -8
Yes, it is incumbent upon the leaders---such as they are. It did not take us many years to climb out of the self-inflicted wounds. Hoke did it in two. Rocky has managed to bring some "stability", but lost the luster that Hoke created. The program is now drifting again upon a sea of apathy. I think you're talking more about wins and losses than structural issues in the school and its athletic department. You can see that winning eight or nine games doesn't draw flies unless they come against the right eight or nine teams. There was a spike in interest when Hoke got here but sooner or later people would have gotten used to his blustery rhetoric. Sooner or later you've gotta beat a name team and Hoke's record in this regard is no better than Rocky's. Rocky's results haven't been much different than Hoke's were or would have been. Both of them pile up their victories against the Little Sisters of the Poor; neither seems able to win a game he isn't supposed to. The OOC schedule is starting to look better (penn st, cal, asu, ucla) - but most of those games are on the road, we have to get at least 1 semi-named and 1 somewhat recognizable team to play us at home every year.
|
|
|
Post by oldasstech on Apr 18, 2014 9:19:34 GMT -8
Find a way to get bodies in the seats. IMHO, aztec football is currently and consistently putting a good product on the field. We need to improve attendance to the games, if that means filling buses with underprivileged junior high and high school kids, then so be it. Just get people in the stands! And that goes for all the people posting on here too. The hell with the game day thread, get your ass in a seat already!
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Apr 18, 2014 9:22:01 GMT -8
Yes, it is incumbent upon the leaders---such as they are. It did not take us many years to climb out of the self-inflicted wounds. Hoke did it in two. Rocky has managed to bring some "stability", but lost the luster that Hoke created. The program is now drifting again upon a sea of apathy. I think you're talking more about wins and losses than structural issues in the school and its athletic department. You can see that winning eight or nine games doesn't draw flies unless they come against the right eight or nine teams. There was a spike in interest when Hoke got here but sooner or later people would have gotten used to his blustery rhetoric. Sooner or later you've gotta beat a name team and Hoke's record in this regard is no better than Rocky's. Rocky's results haven't been much different than Hoke's were or would have been. Both of them pile up their victories against the Little Sisters of the Poor; neither seems able to win a game he isn't supposed to. No, actually I was not thinking so much about the W/L column, but rather---and poorly evidently--the energy which Hoke infused into the program. But he did turn us from an utterly failed program into a bowl winner in two seasons. I'm not sure if any other coach in our history can hold that claim.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Apr 18, 2014 9:25:15 GMT -8
I think you're talking more about wins and losses than structural issues in the school and its athletic department. You can see that winning eight or nine games doesn't draw flies unless they come against the right eight or nine teams. There was a spike in interest when Hoke got here but sooner or later people would have gotten used to his blustery rhetoric. Sooner or later you've gotta beat a name team and Hoke's record in this regard is no better than Rocky's. Rocky's results haven't been much different than Hoke's were or would have been. Both of them pile up their victories against the Little Sisters of the Poor; neither seems able to win a game he isn't supposed to. The OOC schedule is starting to look better (penn st, cal, asu, ucla) - but most of those games are on the road, we have to get at least 1 semi-named and 1 somewhat recognizable team to play us at home every year. Very true. Bringing in more "names" MUST be a priority.
|
|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Apr 18, 2014 9:30:11 GMT -8
The OOC schedule is starting to look better (penn st, cal, asu, ucla) - but most of those games are on the road, we have to get at least 1 semi-named and 1 somewhat recognizable team to play us at home every year. I don't think the OOC schedule is a big problem. For forty years now we've been playing BCS teams both home and away. We aren't going to beat the real big boys very often no matter what. I think we can all understand that. However in most seasons we can and should be able to handle either home or away the likes of Oregon State and North Carolina. It'll be interesting to see what happens this season... We should compete even-up with the lower-mid level teams in the P5 conferences, except perhaps the SEC. OSU should be a fair fight at Corvallis, UNC should be an upper-mid ACC program this year so it may be a tougher game on the road. "Upper-mid" meaning the upper part if the middle third, lower-mid meaning the other side of the middle third. Sent from my DROID RAZR using proboards
|
|
|
Post by RockNFish on Apr 18, 2014 9:33:03 GMT -8
The OOC schedule is starting to look better (penn st, cal, asu, ucla) - but most of those games are on the road, we have to get at least 1 semi-named and 1 somewhat recognizable team to play us at home every year. I don't think the OOC schedule is a big problem. For forty years now we've been playing BCS teams both home and away. We aren't going to beat the real big boys very often no matter what. I think we can all understand that. However in most seasons we can and should be able to handle either home or away the likes of Oregon State and North Carolina. It'll be interesting to see what happens this season... Agree that we have to start beating the mid / lower level P5 home and away. We have drawn some nice crowed when playing named opponents at home (ucla, sc, miami) but other than ucla, i think the last named team to play us at home was probably in the 90's.
|
|
|
Post by AzTex on Apr 18, 2014 9:34:37 GMT -8
I believe there were two reasons the Aztecs had such great attendance during the Coryell years.
1. A great winning record, regardless of the schedule. Bigger name schools did not draw significantly better than our conference games. In San Diego winning might be more important than who we play. Coryell only had one season where he lost more than 2 games. Fans were almost certain they were going to see a win.
2. An exciting style of football. Plenty of opportunity to jump up and down.
When the football program can provide these two things to the fans again attendance will improve.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 9:40:06 GMT -8
Tend to agree with you SGF when it comes to Rocky and his demeanor. However I would rather have fans show because they believe we will win as opposed to thinking the coach is awesome. With Hoke we got both and were lucky to have him. Until Rocky can't win and get us in a bowl he deserves our support considering how bad things have been on the Mesa. Honestly he strikes me as the type to step down anyway when he knows someone else can come in and do a better job. Until that day comes I will continue to support my Aztecs and buy season tickets. Also, I think winning 2 road games against P5 schools early in the year could go a longway I terms of boosting attendance In a bad home schedule year and further raising our profile. Let's see if Rocky and the boys are up to it this year and save the hand wringing for after the results. Don't get me wrong. I think the opinion of some that Rocky's lack of sideline fire costs us games is just silly. Nick Saban is rarely very animated on the sidelines and he sure wins plenty of games. However, I'm not sure Saban would be a good coach for the Aztecs. The HC at Alabama doesn't need to fire up the fan base by doing the kinds of things that Lugie and Hoke did. However, SDSU isn't exactly Bama when it comes to support from students and alumni.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 9:45:57 GMT -8
Yes, it is incumbent upon the leaders---such as they are. It did not take us many years to climb out of the self-inflicted wounds. Hoke did it in two. Rocky has managed to bring some "stability", but lost the luster that Hoke created. The program is now drifting again upon a sea of apathy. I think you're talking more about wins and losses than structural issues in the school and its athletic department. You can see that winning eight or nine games doesn't draw flies unless they come against the right eight or nine teams. There was a spike in interest when Hoke got here but sooner or later people would have gotten used to his blustery rhetoric. Sooner or later you've gotta beat a name team and Hoke's record in this regard is no better than Rocky's. Rocky's results haven't been much different than Hoke's were or would have been. Both of them pile up their victories against the Little Sisters of the Poor; neither seems able to win a game he isn't supposed to. But for the failure of an official to call an obvious block in the back on Missouri's winning TD pass and catch with like 40 seconds left, Hoke would have won that one and IIRC, Mizzou was ranked about #15 going in. Hoke also put a real scare into a TCU team which finished like #4 that year. And Hoke had just two years at SDSU. In three years as SDSU head coach, Rocky has never come close to beating a MWC opponent as good as TCU was (not that he's had such an opportunity because this MWC is far weaker than that one was) nor has he come close to beating an OOC opponent of Missouri's caliber. So with due respect, I disagree with your implicit argument that Rocky is about as good a coach as Hoke.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 9:53:10 GMT -8
To be Fair, Rocky has beaten Boise twice, WSU once. So actually he has done better than Hoke. All three of those have been solid wins, I'll grant you that. Of course, you omit to mention that two years ago, Rocky's rebuilt SDSU team choked away a 10-point second half lead to SJSU and then stunk it up on national TV in our bowl game against BYU and then last year played like total horse plop and got blown out by two schools with markedly inferior talent to us, EIU and UNLV. Rocky is what he's always been, a good coach. However, SDSU can do better and at least IMO, Hoke is somebody who was and would be better.
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Apr 18, 2014 9:53:49 GMT -8
I think you're talking more about wins and losses than structural issues in the school and its athletic department. You can see that winning eight or nine games doesn't draw flies unless they come against the right eight or nine teams. There was a spike in interest when Hoke got here but sooner or later people would have gotten used to his blustery rhetoric. Sooner or later you've gotta beat a name team and Hoke's record in this regard is no better than Rocky's. Rocky's results haven't been much different than Hoke's were or would have been. Both of them pile up their victories against the Little Sisters of the Poor; neither seems able to win a game he isn't supposed to. But for the failure of an official to call an obvious block in the back on Missouri's winning TD pass and catch with like 40 seconds left, Hoke would have won that one and IIRC, Mizzou was ranked about #15 going in. Hoke also put a real scare into a TCU team which finished like #4 that year. And Hoke had just two years at SDSU. In three years as SDSU head coach, Rocky has never come close to beating a MWC opponent as good as TCU was (not that he's had such an opportunity because this MWC is far weaker than that one was) nor has he come close to beating an OOC opponent of Missouri's caliber. So with due respect, I disagree with your implicit argument that Rocky is about as good a coach as Hoke. Hold on. If we are giving out prizes for coming close, than you need to give Rocky Oregon State Last year. And if we are counting collapses, then you have to ask what happened with Wyoming with Hoke. Hoke was a good coach, but frankly he doesn't have the actual wins that Rocky has notched. 2 Boise 1 WSU This is like who can run faster a new born baby giraffe or a tortoise. Neither are truly fast, but you can compare them, if you want.
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Apr 18, 2014 9:54:43 GMT -8
Aztecs are in a difficult position being in the MW . So that means 4 home games against MW teams. Only draws as of now BSU and maybe Fresno- we had them home last year so road games this year. Top recruits are not going to MW schools . Team needs to schedule 1 "money game on the road ". They are trying to book home games against PAC schools but it isn't happening for a couple years. So Aztecs need to market the AZTEC team ,as the local D-1 program in San Diego. This is where Rocky needs to realize that means getting as many coaches and players he can get on the radio ,TV or out in the community as they can - FREE marketing . The football team needs to get out to the San Diego community - shopping centers , high schools , the people they are trying to sell tickets to . San Diego community needs to connect to the Aztecs , but is not going to happen unless the team takes the steps to go to the community and re- establish the connection . Non-alums do not owe the Aztecs anything unless the team goes out to earn it . Start by getting on the media outlets as often as possible then in the community-personal relationships . If Rocky does not buy in then some one needs to be the one making it possible. Athletes/Coaches have time during the Spring /Summer / early fall to be out there. All the football players and coaches should be allowed to be on the air and on TV . Use the media instead of complaining about them. Coach Fisher does it .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 9:56:42 GMT -8
The OOC schedule is starting to look better (penn st, cal, asu, ucla) - but most of those games are on the road, we have to get at least 1 semi-named and 1 somewhat recognizable team to play us at home every year. And that's on Sterk. Effing Wyoming has managed to get the likes of Tennessee, Texas and Nebraska to come to their house by agreeing to 2-for-1s. Unless Rocky is totally opposed to such contracts (and he shouldn't be), I hold Sterk responsible for failing to get that kind of big time opponent to Qualcomm Stadium. Gawd Aztecs football is mismanaged in comparison to SDSU basketball. Grrr.
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Apr 18, 2014 9:59:06 GMT -8
To be Fair, Rocky has beaten Boise twice, WSU once. So actually he has done better than Hoke. All three of those have been solid wins, I'll grant you that. Of course, you omit to mention that two years ago, Rocky's rebuilt SDSU team choked away a 10-point second half lead to SJSU and then stunk it up on national TV in our bowl game against BYU and then last year played like total horse plop and got blown out by two schools with markedly inferior talent to us, EIU and UNLV. Rocky is what he's always been, a good coach. However, SDSU can do better and at least IMO, Hoke is somebody who was and would be better. Hoke's team collapsed to WYO. He also lost to Idaho and UNLV. Listen, Hoke was not all that great of coach and I don't think he was better than Rocky is today. Does this mean Rocky is awesome, no, far from it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2014 10:02:18 GMT -8
But for the failure of an official to call an obvious block in the back on Missouri's winning TD pass and catch with like 40 seconds left, Hoke would have won that one and IIRC, Mizzou was ranked about #15 going in. Hoke also put a real scare into a TCU team which finished like #4 that year. And Hoke had just two years at SDSU. In three years as SDSU head coach, Rocky has never come close to beating a MWC opponent as good as TCU was (not that he's had such an opportunity because this MWC is far weaker than that one was) nor has he come close to beating an OOC opponent of Missouri's caliber. So with due respect, I disagree with your implicit argument that Rocky is about as good a coach as Hoke. Hold on. If we are giving out prizes for coming close, than you need to give Rocky Oregon State Last year. And if we are counting collapses, then you have to ask what happened with Wyoming with Hoke. Hoke was a good coach, but frankly he doesn't have the actual wins that Rocky has notched. 2 Boise 1 WSU This is like who can run faster a new born baby giraffe or a tortoise. Neither are truly fast, but you can compare them, if you want. Oregon State is distinguishable for three reasons. One, the Mizzou game was on the road whereas OSU was at our house. Two, we didn't lose to OSU because of the failure of an official to call a penalty which was right in front of his face. And three, OSU wasn't as highly ranked at Missouri was. As to WSU, JYP may be correct that they're generally garbage but at that point in time, they had destroyed their first two opponents and had the highest PPG average in the country yet Rocky's defense almost totally throttled the Cougars the entire second half. Regarding Boise, winning there two years ago was huge as well. No better example than that only three other opponents have managed that in the last 15 years or so. Is Hoke an immensely better coach than Rocky? No. However - again IMO - he IS better and I'd rather have him than Rocky. Of course, I'd also rather have probably available guys like Mark Hudspeth, but that's for a different thread.
|
|