|
Post by matteosandiego on Sept 2, 2014 14:35:05 GMT -8
Good job by DSmith and Scott & BR today by pushing how horrible the Q is for the Aztecs environment. More public pressure is needed for sure.
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Sept 2, 2014 16:22:08 GMT -8
You seem to miss the point where I speak to why an on campus arena has a bigger benefit than an on-campus stadium. If the university wanted to build an on campus stadium and have the funding capability to do so then why aren't they doing that rather than taking a wait and see approach with what happens with the Chargers? Right now I haven't heard anything serious from the university about building an on-campus facility or any clear plans and funding to buy the Q and the land around it. And you also missed the point that just building an arena didn't make the BB program a success. It took nearly a full decade before they got to a level of success where they are consistently ranked and playing in March Madness routinely - and doing so in the very same conference as the football team. Maybe they will get lucky and get a "big name" coach who would take on a struggling program and stay with it even when opportunities arise to step up to a bigger program. The more likely scenario is that any coach we get will look at the job as a stepping stone to bigger and better things. And what happens if, heaven forbid, they don't get that P5 invitation? That sure isn't locked in stone even with a new Aztec only football stadium? Even if the university were to build a 45K seat stadium they would be looking at trying to attract, at a minimum, 35K people who are not current students to attend. Being on the SDSU campus isn't as important as people on here claim, and the alcohol ban would be a detriment to attacting people to the games . As I've said, I think the best option for all parties, SDSU, the Chargers and the city to build a new stadium on the site of the Q but even the mention of a shared stadium is heresy on here. I really don't think the university has the financial wherewithal to finance their own stadium - even a 40K-45k one - and I don't think the CSU system is going to be willing to fund any part of a stadium deal (either building a new one or purchasing the Q) for SDSU regardless of where it is located. As I have said, and backed it up with numbers, the best option for SDSU is to acquire and develop the Q site for the University. If SDSU builds a new stadium for its football team (and possibly an MLS team) on the site that would just be a bonus. Acquiring an extra 166 acres for SDSU to develop as a West Campus is the bigger picture. If I had to choose between a shared NFL stadium between the Chargers and Aztecs on the Q site or a 166 acre expansion of an SDSU West Campus on the Q site I would choose campus expansion hands down. It is a no brainier. A shared stadium at the Q site would heavily benefit the Chargers and only allow the Aztecs to continue to be tenants. The benefits and long term financial impact on SDSU and the city of San Diego would be immense with an SDSU West Campus expansion. A shared NFL stadium is insignificant on almost every level when compared to an SDSU West Campus expansion. Again, if you can't see this, you just care more about the Chargers than San Diego State University. SDSU hasn't backed it with any numbers and that is what is really important. If the Chargers were to leave the clock would be ticking and it will take a long time for the university to even come close to getting the financial backing to buy or build a new stadium. Sure if the Q disappears and SDSU buys the land (at market value, the voters will not allow them to sell the land at below market value) and they can fund a stadium then more power to them. I expect, at the very least, the CSU is going to want a plan for the site before they commit any money to the deal and they are not going to support the university if that deal includes buying and operating the Q. That money will have to come from "in house sources." If there were to be a new stadium built at the Q site it would continue to be owned by the city. I haven't seen any proposal from the Chargers that end up with them owning the stadium. Both the Chargers and Aztecs would continue to be tenants. It is a hell of a lot more economical for SDSU to be tenants rather than owners. People on here talk about stadiums being a money loser for the city, well it would be a money loser for the Aztecs, and they cannot afford to lose money an their athletic program. Football barely makes enough to fund themselves, much less the other sports. As I have said, I look to what is best for the people of San Diego and since that means I don't blindly throw my support to the wants (not needs) of SDSU's football program that makes me anti-SDSU. No worries. I think the city benefits from having both an NFL team and a D1 school, at least more than they would with only the latter. I also think the people benefit from having a Holiday Bowl and SuperBowls. The city would never, ever consider funding a stadium or selling land at a discount to SDSU for the purpose of funding a stadium for the purpose of keeping SDSU's D1 status alive. I also don't believe that SDSU suffers from playing in a shared stadium, not when you consider the cost of building and operating one of their own. Advertisement can be negotiated (most modern stadiums now use digital advertising), and a specific locker-room for the Aztec team can be included, nowadays field paint is washable so painting the field is no big deal, but if the university wants it all for nothing then they will get what they pay for. I can say that the Chargers don't want or need proceeds from the advertising when it comes to the stadium because it doesn't account for much as compared to what they generate. The belief that having an on-campus stadium is going to make SDSU on par with the big schools just doesn't pass mustard with me. I do also believe that the Q is a crappy stadium for football, it wasn't built to be a football stadium (though some on here wrongly believe that being a "multi-use" stadium qualifies as such. It will never be a good venue for football because of the basic design of it. If you think you're somehow "enlightened" because you so desperately want an Aztec only stadium and don't care how much it costs (because someone else is going to pay for it) how does that differentiate you from a "Charger Honk?" In my case, I keep saying I think a common stadium makes better sense, and the history of the university validates my belief.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Sept 2, 2014 17:08:39 GMT -8
As I have said, and backed it up with numbers, the best option for SDSU is to acquire and develop the Q site for the University. If SDSU builds a new stadium for its football team (and possibly an MLS team) on the site that would just be a bonus. Acquiring an extra 166 acres for SDSU to develop as a West Campus is the bigger picture. If I had to choose between a shared NFL stadium between the Chargers and Aztecs on the Q site or a 166 acre expansion of an SDSU West Campus on the Q site I would choose campus expansion hands down. It is a no brainier. A shared stadium at the Q site would heavily benefit the Chargers and only allow the Aztecs to continue to be tenants. The benefits and long term financial impact on SDSU and the city of San Diego would be immense with an SDSU West Campus expansion. A shared NFL stadium is insignificant on almost every level when compared to an SDSU West Campus expansion. Again, if you can't see this, you just care more about the Chargers than San Diego State University. SDSU hasn't backed it with any numbers and that is what is really important. If the Chargers were to leave the clock would be ticking and it will take a long time for the university to even come close to getting the financial backing to buy or build a new stadium. Sure if the Q disappears and SDSU buys the land (at market value, the voters will not allow them to sell the land at below market value) and they can fund a stadium then more power to them. I expect, at the very least, the CSU is going to want a plan for the site before they commit any money to the deal and they are not going to support the university if that deal includes buying and operating the Q. That money will have to come from "in house sources." If there were to be a new stadium built at the Q site it would continue to be owned by the city. I haven't seen any proposal from the Chargers that end up with them owning the stadium. Both the Chargers and Aztecs would continue to be tenants. It is a hell of a lot more economical for SDSU to be tenants rather than owners. People on here talk about stadiums being a money loser for the city, well it would be a money loser for the Aztecs, and they cannot afford to lose money an their athletic program. Football barely makes enough to fund themselves, much less the other sports. As I have said, I look to what is best for the people of San Diego and since that means I don't blindly throw my support to the wants (not needs) of SDSU's football program that makes me anti-SDSU. No worries. I think the city benefits from having both an NFL team and a D1 school, at least more than they would with only the latter. I also think the people benefit from having a Holiday Bowl and SuperBowls. The city would never, ever consider funding a stadium or selling land at a discount to SDSU for the purpose of funding a stadium for the purpose of keeping SDSU's D1 status alive. I also don't believe that SDSU suffers from playing in a shared stadium, not when you consider the cost of building and operating one of their own. Advertisement can be negotiated (most modern stadiums now use digital advertising), and a specific locker-room for the Aztec team can be included, nowadays field paint is washable so painting the field is no big deal, but if the university wants it all for nothing then they will get what they pay for. I can say that the Chargers don't want or need proceeds from the advertising when it comes to the stadium because it doesn't account for much as compared to what they generate. The belief that having an on-campus stadium is going to make SDSU on par with the big schools just doesn't pass mustard with me. I do also believe that the Q is a crappy stadium for football, it wasn't built to be a football stadium (though some on here wrongly believe that being a "multi-use" stadium qualifies as such. It will never be a good venue for football because of the basic design of it. If you think you're somehow "enlightened" because you so desperately want an Aztec only stadium and don't care how much it costs (because someone else is going to pay for it) how does that differentiate you from a "Charger Honk?" In my case, I keep saying I think a common stadium makes better sense, and the history of the university validates my belief. How is it that someone who is supposedly educated can miss the glaring separation of SDSU and it's athletic programs in regards to what will be done with the 166 acre Qualcomm site? The Chargers need to move their arses on to another location (any location) so that SDSU may expand its campus for the benefit of SDSU, San Diego and the State of California (who will all be winners in this deal). The Aztecs getting their own stadium (the Q at first then a new one when the master plan gets to it) is just a bonus. The Chargers are free to ask the City of San Diego to invest the money (used by SDSU to buy the Q) into a Chargers Stadium. The City and County have already set aside the land the Chargers want downtown for a stadium. The Chargers have NFL money and their own money and they can surely line up money for naming rights. What is holding them back?
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Sept 2, 2014 17:58:25 GMT -8
Some Charger Honks are forgetting that the City and SDSU could also just do a long term lease with no vote necessary, not that one wouldn't pass with flying colors so long as its not tied to something crazy like funding a stadium. You can see the fear of their lost leverage with the City in every post. They want SDSU to be dependent on the Chargers and can't stand the thought of us actually doing our own thing.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Sept 2, 2014 20:01:15 GMT -8
As I have said, and backed it up with numbers, the best option for SDSU is to acquire and develop the Q site for the University. If SDSU builds a new stadium for its football team (and possibly an MLS team) on the site that would just be a bonus. Acquiring an extra 166 acres for SDSU to develop as a West Campus is the bigger picture. If I had to choose between a shared NFL stadium between the Chargers and Aztecs on the Q site or a 166 acre expansion of an SDSU West Campus on the Q site I would choose campus expansion hands down. It is a no brainier. A shared stadium at the Q site would heavily benefit the Chargers and only allow the Aztecs to continue to be tenants. The benefits and long term financial impact on SDSU and the city of San Diego would be immense with an SDSU West Campus expansion. A shared NFL stadium is insignificant on almost every level when compared to an SDSU West Campus expansion. Again, if you can't see this, you just care more about the Chargers than San Diego State University. SDSU hasn't backed it with any numbers and that is what is really important. If the Chargers were to leave the clock would be ticking and it will take a long time for the university to even come close to getting the financial backing to buy or build a new stadium. Sure if the Q disappears and SDSU buys the land (at market value, the voters will not allow them to sell the land at below market value) and they can fund a stadium then more power to them. I expect, at the very least, the CSU is going to want a plan for the site before they commit any money to the deal and they are not going to support the university if that deal includes buying and operating the Q. That money will have to come from "in house sources." If there were to be a new stadium built at the Q site it would continue to be owned by the city. I haven't seen any proposal from the Chargers that end up with them owning the stadium. Both the Chargers and Aztecs would continue to be tenants. It is a hell of a lot more economical for SDSU to be tenants rather than owners. People on here talk about stadiums being a money loser for the city, well it would be a money loser for the Aztecs, and they cannot afford to lose money an their athletic program. Football barely makes enough to fund themselves, much less the other sports. As I have said, I look to what is best for the people of San Diego and since that means I don't blindly throw my support to the wants (not needs) of SDSU's football program that makes me anti-SDSU. No worries. I think the city benefits from having both an NFL team and a D1 school, at least more than they would with only the latter. I also think the people benefit from having a Holiday Bowl and SuperBowls. The city would never, ever consider funding a stadium or selling land at a discount to SDSU for the purpose of funding a stadium for the purpose of keeping SDSU's D1 status alive. I also don't believe that SDSU suffers from playing in a shared stadium, not when you consider the cost of building and operating one of their own. Advertisement can be negotiated (most modern stadiums now use digital advertising), and a specific locker-room for the Aztec team can be included, nowadays field paint is washable so painting the field is no big deal, but if the university wants it all for nothing then they will get what they pay for. I can say that the Chargers don't want or need proceeds from the advertising when it comes to the stadium because it doesn't account for much as compared to what they generate. The belief that having an on-campus stadium is going to make SDSU on par with the big schools just doesn't pass mustard with me. I do also believe that the Q is a crappy stadium for football, it wasn't built to be a football stadium (though some on here wrongly believe that being a "multi-use" stadium qualifies as such. It will never be a good venue for football because of the basic design of it. If you think you're somehow "enlightened" because you so desperately want an Aztec only stadium and don't care how much it costs (because someone else is going to pay for it) how does that differentiate you from a "Charger Honk?" In my case, I keep saying I think a common stadium makes better sense, and the history of the university validates my belief. Did you even read my post? An SDSU football stadium is not the primary goal! An SDSU West Campus expansion at the Q site is! If SDSU is somehow able to privately fund a new Aztec football stadium that would be amazing. However, acquiring and developing an SDSU West campus is the primary objective. I can't help it if you can't see through your Charger Blinders to see "what is best for the people of San Diego." "The mission of San Diego State University shall be to provide well-balanced, high quality education for undergraduate and graduate students and to contribute to knowledge and the solution of problems through excellence and distinction in teaching, research, and service. The university shall impart an appreciation and broad understanding of human experience throughout the world and the ages." I can't say the mission of the Chargers is so noble or that its purpose is to contribute to the advancement of society (aka the people of San Diego). We can go round and round about this but you simply will never have an argument that has any comparative validity.
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Sept 3, 2014 8:03:45 GMT -8
Good job by DSmith and Scott & BR today by pushing how horrible the Q is for the Aztecs environment. More public pressure is needed for sure. Those two clowns (Scott & BR) are two of the biggest "Honks" in San Diego and really care nothing about the Aztecs that doesn't do something for the Chargers.
|
|
|
Post by matteosandiego on Sept 3, 2014 8:10:54 GMT -8
Good job by DSmith and Scott & BR today by pushing how horrible the Q is for the Aztecs environment. More public pressure is needed for sure. Those two clowns (Scott & BR) are two of the biggest "Honks" in San Diego and really care nothing about the Aztecs that doesn't do something for the Chargers. Agreed, their allegiances overwhelmingly lay more with the Chargers for sure. They are the PRO team in this city and both of those guys are not Aztecs or are SD natives. But i will say, having 1090 as the AZTECS flagship now, these two and DSmith have definitely warmed up to SDSU's athletic department a lot more since a year ago when the change was official. They have a big platform in this city and any public opinion on SDSU growing and creating a better environment for football in my eyes and ears is welcomed. I say bring it on, and add more to the bandwagon.
|
|
|
Post by gocoaztec on Sept 3, 2014 16:49:45 GMT -8
There was a village in Africa that had elephants - lots of elephants. They trampled and ate the village's crops and even damaged their homes. But the elephants, like all wild animals, were the property of the government (an unfortunate leftover from British rule). The villagers hated the elephants and wished that they would all go away.
One day, a new government came to power with new ideas. They came to the village and said "the elephants are now yours. You can do with them what you want." Some wanted to kill all the elephants that had destroyed so much property, but wiser heads prevailed. It was decided that the village would manage the elephant herd and sell both photographic and hunting rights to visitors from around the world. This decision generated far more income and prosperity than the village could ever had earned by just growing their crops. The villagers now fiercely defended their elephants and prospered, even though the elephants still regularly damaged their crops.
The villagers had found a way to take something that appeared to be a huge detriment to the village and turned it into their greatest asset.
And all the while the elephants were still elephants.
So what does this have to do with the Aztecs and Chargers?
You decide.
Go Aztecs!
|
|
|
Post by badfish on Sept 3, 2014 16:55:17 GMT -8
There was a village in Africa that had elephants - lots of elephants. They trampled and ate the village's crops and even damaged their homes. But the elephants, like all wild animals, were the property of the government (an unfortunate leftover from British rule). The villagers hated the elephants and wished that they would all go away. One day, a new government came to power with new ideas. They came to the village and said "the elephants are now yours. You can do with them what you want." Some wanted to kill all the elephants that had destroyed so much property, but wiser heads prevailed. It was decided that the village would manage the elephant herd and sell both photographic and hunting rights to visitors from around the world. This decision generated far more income and prosperity than the village could ever had earned by just growing their crops. The villagers now fiercely defended their elephants and prospered, even though the elephants still regularly damaged their crops. The villagers had found a way to take something that appeared to be a huge detriment to the village and turned it into their greatest asset. And all the while the elephants were still elephants. So what does this have to do with the Aztecs and Chargers? You decide. Go Aztecs! Sooooo we get elephants to trample the Q?
|
|
|
Post by rebar619 on Sept 3, 2014 17:26:07 GMT -8
Some Charger Honks are forgetting that the City and SDSU could also just do a long term lease with no vote necessary, not that one wouldn't pass with flying colors so long as its not tied to something crazy like funding a stadium. You can see the fear of their lost leverage with the City in every post. They want SDSU to be dependent on the Chargers and can't stand the thought of us actually doing our own thing. You are the straw man boxing champion. Congrats.
|
|
|
Post by rebar619 on Sept 3, 2014 17:27:20 GMT -8
Good job by DSmith and Scott & BR today by pushing how horrible the Q is for the Aztecs environment. More public pressure is needed for sure. Those two clowns (Scott & BR) are two of the biggest "Honks" in San Diego and really care nothing about the Aztecs that doesn't do something for the Chargers. Cant argue with you on that.
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Sept 4, 2014 16:59:12 GMT -8
SDSU hasn't backed it with any numbers and that is what is really important. If the Chargers were to leave the clock would be ticking and it will take a long time for the university to even come close to getting the financial backing to buy or build a new stadium. Sure if the Q disappears and SDSU buys the land (at market value, the voters will not allow them to sell the land at below market value) and they can fund a stadium then more power to them. I expect, at the very least, the CSU is going to want a plan for the site before they commit any money to the deal and they are not going to support the university if that deal includes buying and operating the Q. That money will have to come from "in house sources." If there were to be a new stadium built at the Q site it would continue to be owned by the city. I haven't seen any proposal from the Chargers that end up with them owning the stadium. Both the Chargers and Aztecs would continue to be tenants. It is a hell of a lot more economical for SDSU to be tenants rather than owners. People on here talk about stadiums being a money loser for the city, well it would be a money loser for the Aztecs, and they cannot afford to lose money an their athletic program. Football barely makes enough to fund themselves, much less the other sports. As I have said, I look to what is best for the people of San Diego and since that means I don't blindly throw my support to the wants (not needs) of SDSU's football program that makes me anti-SDSU. No worries. I think the city benefits from having both an NFL team and a D1 school, at least more than they would with only the latter. I also think the people benefit from having a Holiday Bowl and SuperBowls. The city would never, ever consider funding a stadium or selling land at a discount to SDSU for the purpose of funding a stadium for the purpose of keeping SDSU's D1 status alive. I also don't believe that SDSU suffers from playing in a shared stadium, not when you consider the cost of building and operating one of their own. Advertisement can be negotiated (most modern stadiums now use digital advertising), and a specific locker-room for the Aztec team can be included, nowadays field paint is washable so painting the field is no big deal, but if the university wants it all for nothing then they will get what they pay for. I can say that the Chargers don't want or need proceeds from the advertising when it comes to the stadium because it doesn't account for much as compared to what they generate. The belief that having an on-campus stadium is going to make SDSU on par with the big schools just doesn't pass mustard with me. I do also believe that the Q is a crappy stadium for football, it wasn't built to be a football stadium (though some on here wrongly believe that being a "multi-use" stadium qualifies as such. It will never be a good venue for football because of the basic design of it. If you think you're somehow "enlightened" because you so desperately want an Aztec only stadium and don't care how much it costs (because someone else is going to pay for it) how does that differentiate you from a "Charger Honk?" In my case, I keep saying I think a common stadium makes better sense, and the history of the university validates my belief. How is it that someone who is supposedly educated can miss the glaring separation of SDSU and it's athletic programs in regards to what will be done with the 166 acre Qualcomm site? The Chargers need to move their arses on to another location (any location) so that SDSU may expand its campus for the benefit of SDSU, San Diego and the State of California (who will all be winners in this deal). The Aztecs getting their own stadium (the Q at first then a new one when the master plan gets to it) is just a bonus. The Chargers are free to ask the City of San Diego to invest the money (used by SDSU to buy the Q) into a Chargers Stadium. The City and County have already set aside the land the Chargers want downtown for a stadium. The Chargers have NFL money and their own money and they can surely line up money for naming rights. What is holding them back? Supposedly educated? That's nice. I am pointing out the fact that any money the university spends to procure a new stadium (either to tear down and build a new one or use the Q for either the short or long term) is going to have to come from sources outside of the CSU system. Where is that money going to come from? I don't thing you care a whit about the university expansion as much as you want an Aztec only football stadium regardless of whether that makes any financial sense. I am just saying that a joint use stadium makes more economic sense for all the parties involved and I have reiterated that I would prefer a new stadium be built on the east end of the Q site as initially proposed. I just don't see where the university is going to be able to tap the alumni and students for hundreds of millions of dollars to buy or build a new stadium, especially when the future of college football for non P5 schools is in a state of flux. As for expanding the campus I would actually prefer that they do that on-campus or in the surrounding area. I like the idea of having the classrooms and student housing within walking distance of each other since the students should be attending classes more that 6 times per year if they want to be "supposedly educated" like me. Many of the older classroom buildings are obsolete and inefficient in their use of the available space and should be demolished and replaced. There are properties surrounding the university that can be annexed (some the university probably already owns) to take care of expansion needs for the actual campus itself.
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Sept 4, 2014 17:16:40 GMT -8
SDSU hasn't backed it with any numbers and that is what is really important. If the Chargers were to leave the clock would be ticking and it will take a long time for the university to even come close to getting the financial backing to buy or build a new stadium. Sure if the Q disappears and SDSU buys the land (at market value, the voters will not allow them to sell the land at below market value) and they can fund a stadium then more power to them. I expect, at the very least, the CSU is going to want a plan for the site before they commit any money to the deal and they are not going to support the university if that deal includes buying and operating the Q. That money will have to come from "in house sources." If there were to be a new stadium built at the Q site it would continue to be owned by the city. I haven't seen any proposal from the Chargers that end up with them owning the stadium. Both the Chargers and Aztecs would continue to be tenants. It is a hell of a lot more economical for SDSU to be tenants rather than owners. People on here talk about stadiums being a money loser for the city, well it would be a money loser for the Aztecs, and they cannot afford to lose money an their athletic program. Football barely makes enough to fund themselves, much less the other sports. As I have said, I look to what is best for the people of San Diego and since that means I don't blindly throw my support to the wants (not needs) of SDSU's football program that makes me anti-SDSU. No worries. I think the city benefits from having both an NFL team and a D1 school, at least more than they would with only the latter. I also think the people benefit from having a Holiday Bowl and SuperBowls. The city would never, ever consider funding a stadium or selling land at a discount to SDSU for the purpose of funding a stadium for the purpose of keeping SDSU's D1 status alive. I also don't believe that SDSU suffers from playing in a shared stadium, not when you consider the cost of building and operating one of their own. Advertisement can be negotiated (most modern stadiums now use digital advertising), and a specific locker-room for the Aztec team can be included, nowadays field paint is washable so painting the field is no big deal, but if the university wants it all for nothing then they will get what they pay for. I can say that the Chargers don't want or need proceeds from the advertising when it comes to the stadium because it doesn't account for much as compared to what they generate. The belief that having an on-campus stadium is going to make SDSU on par with the big schools just doesn't pass mustard with me. I do also believe that the Q is a crappy stadium for football, it wasn't built to be a football stadium (though some on here wrongly believe that being a "multi-use" stadium qualifies as such. It will never be a good venue for football because of the basic design of it. If you think you're somehow "enlightened" because you so desperately want an Aztec only stadium and don't care how much it costs (because someone else is going to pay for it) how does that differentiate you from a "Charger Honk?" In my case, I keep saying I think a common stadium makes better sense, and the history of the university validates my belief. Did you even read my post? An SDSU football stadium is not the primary goal! An SDSU West Campus expansion at the Q site is! If SDSU is somehow able to privately fund a new Aztec football stadium that would be amazing. However, acquiring and developing an SDSU West campus is the primary objective. I can't help it if you can't see through your Charger Blinders to see "what is best for the people of San Diego." "The mission of San Diego State University shall be to provide well-balanced, high quality education for undergraduate and graduate students and to contribute to knowledge and the solution of problems through excellence and distinction in teaching, research, and service. The university shall impart an appreciation and broad understanding of human experience throughout the world and the ages." I can't say the mission of the Chargers is so noble or that its purpose is to contribute to the advancement of society (aka the people of San Diego). We can go round and round about this but you simply will never have an argument that has any comparative validity. I suppose when such a post is created in a thread talking about how the Q is bad for Aztec football it might shape the discussion somewhat, especially when posters routinely talk about building a new stadium or remodeling the Q as an Aztec only venue on that particular site. I would be tempted to ask you how would you feel about buying the Q site and tearing down the Q in order to pursue those educational goals even if it meant that it left the Aztecs with no place to play? How many posts have you posted about a "high quality education" for SDSU students as compared to those you post on here about Aztec sports or even the Aztec football program specifically? I really don't see Aztec fans using "campus expansion" in order to sneak in a new stadium for their team as being any less "noble" than the Chargers and city discussing a downtown stadium as part of a convention center. Collegiate football is in the business to make money (why all this talk of the P5 if it wasn't the case), no different than the NFL. It doesn't do crap for the education of students (and even makes them pay more fees to fund it) and anyone who thinks that is the goal is being incredibly naive.
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Sept 4, 2014 18:46:49 GMT -8
As of today and what looks like a solid bet the Aztecs are going to be playing at the Q next year and will be in the MW . With 2015 home MW games :Fresno, Nevada, USU and Wyoming plus two OOC home games. Rocky uses the Q/ NFL stadium as a recruiting chip for recruits that some day dream to play in the NFL - . Is it better then the other MW schools stadiums ? The most important people to ask IMO are RECRUITS . The players that can directly improve the program . Little doubt most of us think the Q is not a first rate stadium . But what is important to the guys playing on the field for SDSU . There are things that can be done to improve the fan experience . Tarp the top three decks and end zones- to consolidate the fans. Realize you need a solid winning team on the field . Explain to the marketeers you can not just promote games in the media but need to do it in the communities of San Diego County ,North ,South , East ,West , in the Middle and Inland Empire . Stop complaining about the Q until we can do something about it . Last month there were fans that predicted that SDSU would no longer have a football team . Money is still tight is the group making decisions going to jump into building a stadium if they think SDSU will fail or watch what happens in 2016 after stipends and other P5 rules get incorporated and what happens to the G5 . Where is the money going to come from for SDSU stipends ...? As UCLA has proved when the team is someone the local fans want to come watch then is the time to talk about venues .
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Sept 4, 2014 20:18:38 GMT -8
Did you even read my post? An SDSU football stadium is not the primary goal! An SDSU West Campus expansion at the Q site is! If SDSU is somehow able to privately fund a new Aztec football stadium that would be amazing. However, acquiring and developing an SDSU West campus is the primary objective. I can't help it if you can't see through your Charger Blinders to see "what is best for the people of San Diego." "The mission of San Diego State University shall be to provide well-balanced, high quality education for undergraduate and graduate students and to contribute to knowledge and the solution of problems through excellence and distinction in teaching, research, and service. The university shall impart an appreciation and broad understanding of human experience throughout the world and the ages." I can't say the mission of the Chargers is so noble or that its purpose is to contribute to the advancement of society (aka the people of San Diego). We can go round and round about this but you simply will never have an argument that has any comparative validity. I suppose when such a post is created in a thread talking about how the Q is bad for Aztec football it might shape the discussion somewhat, especially when posters routinely talk about building a new stadium or remodeling the Q as an Aztec only venue on that particular site. I would be tempted to ask you how would you feel about buying the Q site and tearing down the Q in order to pursue those educational goals even if it meant that it left the Aztecs with no place to play? How many posts have you posted about a "high quality education" for SDSU students as compared to those you post on here about Aztec sports or even the Aztec football program specifically? I really don't see Aztec fans using "campus expansion" in order to sneak in a new stadium for their team as being any less "noble" than the Chargers and city discussing a downtown stadium as part of a convention center. Collegiate football is in the business to make money (why all this talk of the P5 if it wasn't the case), no different than the NFL. It doesn't do crap for the education of students (and even makes them pay more fees to fund it) and anyone who thinks that is the goal is being incredibly naive. Indeed I would be sad if SDSU could not fund a new Aztec football stadium and was forced to demolish the Q so that development of SDSU West Campus could proceed. I would also be extremely disappointed if the Aztecs were not able to compete at the highest level of collegiate football (currently FBS). However, SDSU would likely have some time (likely 8-10) years to fund one upon acquiring the Q site. Jim Sterk himself has said the soonest a stadium could be built "if the stars aligned and there were no law suits as to its location would be about 8 years." We will probably have a clearer picture of where SDSU's football fate will be in 10 years or less which will help with the decision making process. Will we continue to be included in what is now FBS, will we get an invite to a P5 league or will we drop football completely as many other CSU's have done? Assuming we are still included in the FBS I would want SDSU to make every effort to fund & build an SDSU stadium either at the Q site or at one of the identified locations on campus. Spare us your comparisons of collegiate football vs the NFL or the morals/ethics of the Aztecs vs the Chargers. The NFL and the Chargers mission is to make a profit. San Diego State University is a non-profit entity whose mission is to provide a high quality well rounded educational experience to the people of San Diego. NFL teams split $6 billion in revenue and the Chargers profit was over $222 million last year alone. www.forbes.com/nfl-valuations/list/ Contrast that with "just 23 of 228 athletics departments at NCAA Division I public schools generated enough money on their own to cover their expenses in 2012. Of that group, 16 also received some type of subsidy — and 10 of those 16 athletics departments received more subsidy money in 2012 than they did in 2011." www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2013/05/07/ncaa-finances-subsidies/2142443/ If the Aztecs do build a stadium it will be funded by a combination of naming rights, private funding and likely a student voted referendum. Vastly different than what the Chargers want; a billion dollar NFL stadium monstrosity with a large portion funded by the tax payer. I don't currently foresee the Chargers leaving San Diego. So, they will likely get a stadium somewhere in San Diego (downtown seems to be their target; assuming the tax payers vote for it). Thus, if SDSU was not able fund its own stadium the Charger stadium could be a fallback option for the Aztecs (last resort option). I don't post often about education or politics unless it is a related issue to athletics in a thread (as it is in this thread). After all this is primarily an Aztec Sports message board. Regardless of what happens with the fate of Aztec football or the possibility of funding an SDSU stadium the University needs to do everything in its power to acquire & develop the Q site. The opportunity to expand SDSU by 166 acres is a game changer for the university. After all, SDSU's current footprint is land-locked with little room remaining for expansion. Certainly nowhere near the 166 acres available at the Q site. Round and round we go... Some actual facts/data/links/quotes (besides your opinion) would be helpful if you wish to show any shred of credibility/validity for your argument (I tire of doing the research for you).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2014 9:11:32 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Sept 5, 2014 9:24:44 GMT -8
If a vote happens in 2016 he's also going to be campaigning for reelection so it will be interesting to see how he uses this in his efforts.
|
|
|
Post by aztecripper on Sept 5, 2014 10:03:19 GMT -8
The Q would be rocking every Saturday if we were in the PAC 14. Imagine how many fans from the opposing school would show up to beautiful sunny San Diego. We don't play anyone at home this season with a real fan base following. This is part of the problem with our poor attendance. There are many issues with our crappy stadium at the moment, but our schedule doesn't help either.
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Sept 7, 2014 9:57:33 GMT -8
I'd place the odds of the Chargers getting a new stadium in San Diego at around 50% (a bit more if they win, a bit less if the don't). The odds of SDSU either building or buying the Q (for the purpose of using the stadium) at significantly less. The odds of SDSU building a stadium if the Chargers get a new stadium at either the site of the Q or downtown pretty much nil. It would be hard to convince alumni to put forth money for an Aztec only stadium where there is a perfectly good stadium option in the city. The funny thing is, were the Chargers to leave, almost immediately there would be a push to bring another NFL franchise to San Diego. The irony of this is that the Raiders would be one of the names mentioned. Obviously attracting another NFL team would require a new stadium.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2014 10:03:54 GMT -8
I'd place the odds of the Chargers getting a new stadium in San Diego at around 50% (a bit more if they win, a bit less if the don't). The odds of SDSU either building or buying the Q (for the purpose of using the stadium) at significantly less. The odds of SDSU building a stadium if the Chargers get a new stadium at either the site of the Q or downtown pretty much nil. It would be hard to convince alumni to put forth money for an Aztec only stadium where there is a perfectly good stadium option in the city. The funny thing is, were the Chargers to leave, almost immediately there would be a push to bring another NFL franchise to San Diego. The irony of this is that the Raiders would be one of the names mentioned. Obviously attracting another NFL team would require a new stadium. Oh nice, you provided odds. Please provide citation for your sources......oh wait.
|
|