|
Post by Den60 on Sept 7, 2014 13:11:59 GMT -8
TV money. That's it. That's the only reason/way anyone has recently gotten into the P5 and the only reason/way we will ever have a chance at getting in. It's not a stadium, game attendance, and even winning alone. Again, even winning ALONE isn't going to do it. 13-0 over a bunch of mediocre teams and MWC championship means nothing if no cares to tune in except for Aztecmesa and their distant cousins. We have to become a BRAND that people want to watch. A LOT of people. In SD, in CA, and more importantly Nation wide. Like Boise became a few years ago but even to a higher degree. If we do not provide a TV viewing generated revenue to a P5 conference, they won't give a damn about us. P5 only cares about TV revenue and whether or not you can generate enough that is worth them dividing their pie an additional slice. Now how to become that brand, that team that everyone wants to watch, we'll that's the trick isn't it? The only possible way, as I see it, that we will boost attendance to the 35,000 or more every week is to win practically every game we play. And some of those wins are going to have to be against schools that matter. Nevada does not matter. No disrespect to the Wolfpack, but nobody much outside of Nevada is going to care if we beat them. Same for wins over Colorado State, San Jose State, Wyoming, etc., etc. A win over Boise State counts for something, but less than a couple of years ago. If the Broncos keep stumbling, a win over them will count for little. And a loss to them, or to any of the other weak sisters with whom we associate, will just make Easterners, who apparently think we play in the Big West, believe that there is not much difference between SDSU and Idaho. Or New Mexico State. Yes, winning will do it, but we're talking about winning almost every game, and over an extended number of seasons. Anybody want to wager on the odds of that happening? AzWm Both Utah and TCU used the MW to get to bigger and better things but they were both very successful in MWC football before making the jump though both those teams also had some success against the "big name" schools as well. Both of them have struggled some since leaving but they built up a trust with their fan base that gives them a few years to make the adjustment. The goal of the program should be in dominating the conference right now. There is no problem scheduling some lower level P5 schools who are willing to agree to a home and away deal but SDSU has to win those games to generate ticket sales. Last year SDSU put an average of about 23K butts in the seats for football, which means about 1/3 or season tickets (or more) were not being used. That is a bad sign because while those season ticket holders may be willing to use their seats as a "donation" to the university it also shows they are very tepid in their support of the program. Win in San Diego and people will attend, lose and they don't. That is a fact when it comes to sports in this town. SDSU needs to become a dominant power in what is left of the MWC before San Diegans are going to start giving support to the program. SDSU has been better of late but they still haven't won the confidence of the community. Big losses to OSU and Michigan didn't help and neither did a humiliating loss to Eastern Illinois. Last year they started out with 3 straight losses. Most people tuned them out after that even though it was, overall, a "successful" season with a bowl appearance (and win). Their loss last night was at least a respectable one but losing doesn't help garner interest no matter how respectable it is. A win against a ranked opponent would have helped sell tickets for the first game against UNLV (and possibly future games) though a loss the following week would tend to temper those sales. Since SDSU isn't a big draw there really is no reason for potential fans to buy tickets 3 weeks ahead of time, there will be plenty available. Following the UNC loss with a loss against OSU pretty much means that attendance will again suffer this year so this upcoming game is pretty crucial to the program.
|
|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Sept 7, 2014 13:28:39 GMT -8
But CAN we get into a P5 conference going 7-4 or 8-4 every year (and losing to tougher competition because of 4th quarter meltdowns)? Is this all just an excercise in futility, or do you really, honestly believe that we can get in one of those conferences playing the way we play? Because we know we CAN be the big fish in the small pond if that's what we want. We CAN get 10 and 11 win seasons every year if whe schedule right. That just won't get us in a P5 conference... Another short-sighted analysis. Rutgers and Maryland proved thatvyou are wrong. Settling for the lower division is accepting the eventual strangulation leading to our relegation. TV money matters. Relationship to the P5 matters and eventually will in hoops too. Sent from my SM-G900V using proboards
|
|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Sept 7, 2014 13:30:43 GMT -8
Your OP asked whether SDSU should aspire to get into a P5 conference and that's the question Matt answered and then you criticize him for allegedly arguing we will. As Matt said, your question was dumb and your response to him was equally dumb. Perhaps I should have been clearer. Should SDSU even bother to try to get into a P5 conference? All we've seen over the last 20 years is futility in trying to elevate the program to a major conference. We lose almost all the games we need to win in order to be taken seriously, and we lose games that we shouldn't to inferior competition on an annual basis. Are we shooting ourselves in the collective foot in an attempt to jump up to the next level? Unless the school is prepared to put significantly more money into the program we are highly unlikely to see the kind of success against P5 teams in the Top 25 that we need to see in order to make that jump. We can beat lesser teams. We can dominate at the MWC level (and lower, for OOC games). Can we beat P5 teams in the Top 25 often enough to be taken seriously? Can we beat them at all? Thy college football system is rigged. The big boys don't want us elevated, so we're fighting against the tide. No, it's not impossible to succeed in that attempt, but it's extremly difficult at best. You pounded this same agenda last year, never truly accepting the converse argument against your evangelical bent. Are we in for the same the year? Sent from my SM-G900V using proboards
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Sept 7, 2014 13:35:16 GMT -8
Lol. You guys are unbelievable.
|
|
|
Post by matteosandiego on Sept 7, 2014 13:39:02 GMT -8
Sorry no disrespect but has to be one of the dumbest posts ive read. You dont get top tier recruits by settling/scheduling to be the best of the little people. You get better by aiming for better. Which is what SDSU has done and it is working. UNC is the best team we will play all season and we should have won. Asking for wether we should tuck our tail between the legs, take our ball and go play elsewhere is ridiculous man. We are nowhere near getting in a P5 conference right now, and if you think we are you are completely delusional (like many fans are - they see what they want to see). We AREN'T getting top tier recruits now. Our recruiting would take a very small hit if we stopped scheduling Ohio State, Notre Dame, and Michigan, but we'd win a lot more games. There are pros and cons to both strategies. But the big question is can we get into a P5 conference playing the way we've been playing for the last 5 years? I don't think so. Utah screwed us. Their struggles (and outright failures) in the Pac 12 will only serve to add doubt to those running any P5 conference that would even consider us. If UTAH is a consistent failure in the Pac 12, how can WE do any better? Utah was a top 20 school several times over the last decade plus. We are not. Unless we beat a couple of these P5 teams we aren't getting in. I think you are assuming that getting into a P5 conference requires winning. The evolution that college football is undergoing in forming these conferences is more about financial factors rather than who did so and so beat this week, and so on. (Example:Rutgers & Maryland) Our recruiting has remarkebly improved from the Chuck Long era if you havent noticed. Utah screwed nobody. If anything its Missouri, Texas A&M, and The SEC that screwed all of college football starting all of this mess. Our scheduling the big boys has more to do with finances. If we ONLY schedule the UTEPs, CAL POLYs, and Northern Arizona's of the world you will set us back even more financially than we already are. If you look at the next two years schedule, we have a home & home with Cal Berkley. Very winnable. Also games vs Penn State, very winnable. Northern Illinois, very winnable. Hell UNC was beaten last night, and they are top 25!!! If we were to join the Big12 or the PAC the budget for all things athletics would skyrocket. Which would bring growth and definitely make things more attractive to keeping our San Diego HS talent staying here and more proud to be an Aztec over a Bruin or Trojan. You site Utah or even Colorado as your examples of sucking in the PAC...well they dont have NEARLY the kind of top level athelete that the State of California has. Not even a fair comparison. Most of these PAC schools like Oregon, Washington and Arizona are all filled with California kids. Many from right here in SD. That would absolutely change if SDSU were to join a P5 conference. If you cant see that then YOU are dilusional my friend.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Sept 7, 2014 13:42:42 GMT -8
Um, What?
Invites to the next level seem to have little to nothing to do with winning records. No program in their right mind would turn down an invite to a P5 conference. This is a dumb thread.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Sept 7, 2014 13:44:43 GMT -8
We are nowhere near getting in a P5 conference right now, and if you think we are you are completely delusional (like many fans are - they see what they want to see). We AREN'T getting top tier recruits now. Our recruiting would take a very small hit if we stopped scheduling Ohio State, Notre Dame, and Michigan, but we'd win a lot more games. There are pros and cons to both strategies. But the big question is can we get into a P5 conference playing the way we've been playing for the last 5 years? I don't think so. Utah screwed us. Their struggles (and outright failures) in the Pac 12 will only serve to add doubt to those running any P5 conference that would even consider us. If UTAH is a consistent failure in the Pac 12, how can WE do any better? Utah was a top 20 school several times over the last decade plus. We are not. Unless we beat a couple of these P5 teams we aren't getting in. I think you are assuming that getting into a P5 conference requires winning. The evolution that college football is undergoing in forming these conferences is more about financial factors rather than who did so and so beat this week, and so on. (Example:Rutgers & Maryland) Our recruiting has remarkebly improved from the Chuck Long era if you havent noticed. Utah screwed nobody. If anything its Missouri, Texas A&M, and The SEC that screwed all of college football starting all of this mess. Our scheduling the big boys has more to do with finances. If we ONLY schedule the UTEPs, CAL POLYs, and Northern Arizona's of the world you will set us back even more financially than we already are. If you look at the next two years schedule, we have a home & home with Cal Berkley. Very winnable. Also games vs Penn State, very winnable. Northern Illinois, very winnable. Hell UNC was beaten last night, and they are top 25!!! If we were to join the Big12 or the PAC the budget for all things athletics would skyrocket. Which would bring growth and definitely make things more attractive to keeping our San Diego HS talent staying here and more proud to be an Aztec over a Bruin or Trojan. You site Utah or even Colorado as your examples of sucking in the PAC...well they dont have NEARLY the kind of top level athelete that the State of California has. Not even a fair comparison. Most of these PAC schools like Oregon, Washington and Arizona are all filled with California kids. Many from right here in SD. That would absolutely change if SDSU were to join a P5 conference. If you cant see that then YOU are dilusional my friend. I can see that, but what I can't see is the support within those conferences for SDSU as it is and has been. They don't take us seriously in any way. Except, maybe, as a sacrificial lamb for their teams to play. Yes, getting in a P5 conference would change everything, but can we do it? It DOES require winning, because people aren't going to tune in to watch what they perceive as a crappy, small time football team. TV ratings requires the perception of the program be that it is capable of beating anyone on any given Saturday. We aren't, and they (both potential viewers and the P5 conference A.D.'s & University Presidents) know it. So can we get this program to where we are viewed as being as good as Utah and TCU were? We are a LONG way off from that right now, and that's even with four winning seasons in a row with Bowl appearances.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Sept 7, 2014 13:51:42 GMT -8
You pounded this same agenda last year, never truly accepting the converse argument against your evangelical bent. Are we in for the same the year? Actually, my evangelical bent was for replacing a good but not great head coach if the goal was (and is) to get into a P5 conference. At this point I'm beginning to believe that we may never get to that level, and attempting to do so is resulting is frustration and a fractured fan base. The question I'm posing now is not whether or not we need to replace Rocky (that's not going to happen), but rather whether or not continuing to schedule the Michigan's, Ohio States, and Notre Dame's of the world is the right thing to do. We're just frustrating our fanbase and instilling a feeling of NO confidence in the program among San Diego football fans by continuing to do so when it continues to come with no success. I honestly don't know which would be smarter - focusing on scheduling teams we can beat and adding one mid level P5 team per year on a home/home basis or continuing to take on all possible top level opponents. Unless something radical changes we aren't going to get into a P5 conference. Is that radical change even possible??
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Sept 7, 2014 13:57:58 GMT -8
You pounded this same agenda last year, never truly accepting the converse argument against your evangelical bent. Are we in for the same the year? Actually, my evangelical bent was for replacing a good but not great head coach if the goal was (and is) to get into a P5 conference. At this point I'm beginning to believe that we may never get to that level, and attempting to do so is resulting is frustration and a fractured fan base. The question I'm posing now is not whether or not we need to replace Rocky (that's not going to happen), but rather whether or not continuing to schedule the Michigan's, Ohio States, and Notre Dame's of the world is the right thing to do. We're just frustrating our fanbase and instilling a feeling of NO confidence in the program among San Diego football fans by continuing to do so when it continues to come with no success. I honestly don't know which would be smarter - focusing on scheduling teams we can beat and adding one mid level P5 team per year on a home/home basis or continuing to take on all possible top level opponents. Unless something radical changes we aren't going to get into a P5 conference. Is that radical change even possible?? I anticipate the scheduling to remain this: 1 FCS tune-up (NAU) 1 mid-level P5 game that we would be competitive in -- OR St or Cal 1 P5 Pay game (you know to pay the bills) -- UNC or Penn St. 1 G5 game -- Idaho or NIU I don't think that formula would change much if we were a P5 or a G5 -- the only difference would be the P5 pay game would become a P5 challenge game
|
|
|
Post by matteosandiego on Sept 7, 2014 14:05:19 GMT -8
I think you are assuming that getting into a P5 conference requires winning. The evolution that college football is undergoing in forming these conferences is more about financial factors rather than who did so and so beat this week, and so on. (Example:Rutgers & Maryland) Our recruiting has remarkebly improved from the Chuck Long era if you havent noticed. Utah screwed nobody. If anything its Missouri, Texas A&M, and The SEC that screwed all of college football starting all of this mess. Our scheduling the big boys has more to do with finances. If we ONLY schedule the UTEPs, CAL POLYs, and Northern Arizona's of the world you will set us back even more financially than we already are. If you look at the next two years schedule, we have a home & home with Cal Berkley. Very winnable. Also games vs Penn State, very winnable. Northern Illinois, very winnable. Hell UNC was beaten last night, and they are top 25!!! If we were to join the Big12 or the PAC the budget for all things athletics would skyrocket. Which would bring growth and definitely make things more attractive to keeping our San Diego HS talent staying here and more proud to be an Aztec over a Bruin or Trojan. You site Utah or even Colorado as your examples of sucking in the PAC...well they dont have NEARLY the kind of top level athelete that the State of California has. Not even a fair comparison. Most of these PAC schools like Oregon, Washington and Arizona are all filled with California kids. Many from right here in SD. That would absolutely change if SDSU were to join a P5 conference. If you cant see that then YOU are dilusional my friend. I can see that, but what I can't see is the support within those conferences for SDSU as it is and has been. They don't take us seriously in any way. Except, maybe, as a sacrificial lamb for their teams to play. Yes, getting in a P5 conference would change everything, but can we do it? It DOES require winning, because people aren't going to tune in to watch what they perceive as a crappy, small time football team. TV ratings requires the perception of the program be that it is capable of beating anyone on any given Saturday. We aren't, and they (both potential viewers and the P5 conference A.D.'s & University Presidents) know it. So can we get this program to where we are viewed as being as good as Utah and TCU were? We are a LONG way off from that right now, and that's even with four winning seasons in a row with Bowl appearances. I can understand your view but dont agree. Being in San Diego is both a blessing and a curse. Curse because its a smaller program. But as we all know and say, is packed with so much potential. SDSU would not be a sacrificial lamb like soo many others are in these big time conferences. Just the population of football talent, potential viewers, and location makes SD legitimate option for being a big time level program. I dont think we are as far off from TCU or Utah as you may think. One special QB can catapult this program to get many more donors and fans. Ask Baylor. Of course being in California has its drawbacks from growth with the state being broke and all. Bottom line i believe in the leadership of the AD and Coach Rocky. Its a long tough process but ive seen things haplen these last years ive never seen on the Mesa before. You cannot downplay those things. You have to continue to build on them until you get where u need to be. So in other words, no SDSU should not give up.
|
|
|
Post by sancarlosaztec on Sept 7, 2014 14:19:20 GMT -8
After last night's repeat of a 4th quarter meltdown by the Aztecs where they snatch defeat from the jaws of victory yet again I started wondering... Should we really try to get into a P5 conference, or should we focus on being a big fish in a small pond? Is it really smart to keep scheduling these MidWest and East Coast games against P5 teams? Or would it be smarter to schedule competition that is easier to beat? Would it be easier to build fan momentum by going 11-1 against mediocre competition, or going 8-4 against tougher competition? What makes more sense, given this program's last 34 years? We can't count on getting another Marshall Faulk who can single handedly drive attendance. So if we can't get the kind of superstar players that bring crowds themselves, would going 11-1 against mediocre teams be more impressive to the locals than going 7-5 or 8-4 against tougher/name teams? What should the long term plan/strategy be? Erik, our guys outplayed an east coast ACC top 25 team in front of 63k hostile fans. Yes, we didn't close the deal and that is a real travesty. But what you ask us to contemplate is crazy. I just can't get my mind around that kind of thinking. The root of college football is competing. Our guys compete very well against that level of competition. Our program belongs there. A good competitor hates to lose, yet isn't afraid to risk disappointment. I am proud of how our teams now compete, win or lose we belong there. Never give up the fight.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Sept 7, 2014 14:27:11 GMT -8
After last night's repeat of a 4th quarter meltdown by the Aztecs where they snatch defeat from the jaws of victory yet again I started wondering... Should we really try to get into a P5 conference, or should we focus on being a big fish in a small pond? Is it really smart to keep scheduling these MidWest and East Coast games against P5 teams? Or would it be smarter to schedule competition that is easier to beat? Would it be easier to build fan momentum by going 11-1 against mediocre competition, or going 8-4 against tougher competition? What makes more sense, given this program's last 34 years? We can't count on getting another Marshall Faulk who can single handedly drive attendance. So if we can't get the kind of superstar players that bring crowds themselves, would going 11-1 against mediocre teams be more impressive to the locals than going 7-5 or 8-4 against tougher/name teams? What should the long term plan/strategy be? Erik, our guys outplayed an east coast ACC top 25 team in front of 63k hostile fans. Yes, we didn't close the deal and that is a real travesty. But what you ask us to contemplate is crazy. I just can't get my mind around that kind of thinking. The root of college football is competing. Our guys compete very well against that level of competition. Our program belongs there. A good competitor hates to lose, yet isn't afraid to risk disappointment. I am proud of how our teams now compete, win or lose we belong there. Never give up the fight. But by consistenly losing EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE GAMES all the Athletic Department is doing is turning off the San Diego football fans more and more every year. That's a huge problem. If we won these games every now and then I'd say, absolutely, we HAVE to keep scheduling these top teams. But since we literally never beat them (Top 25 P5 teams) at some point do we need to look at reality and recognize that these games are hurting us more than they're helping us? Just a question...
|
|
|
Post by 1969aztec on Sept 7, 2014 15:59:36 GMT -8
Erik, your question is a critical one. Thankfully, I can answer it, though probably not to anyone's satisfaction. Here's the deal. We aren't going anywhere. We had a chance in the Big-East deal, but that didn't work out. (Yes, I know, the American Athletic Conference is now one of the great unwashed. AAC membership would still have been better than what we have, but that's now ancient history.) If you read the article about college football haves and have nots in yesterday's fish wrap (the UT), you will remember what the author said about further expansion of the P5 conferences. Ain't happening. All this talk about more realignment is the rankest kind of wishful thinking. That author made clear that one of the main aims of the P5 consortium is to crush the G5 conferences. I, personally, think it's short-sighted, but plenty of people do stupid, short-sighted things every day. And some of them have PhDs, which would include those who run college athletic conferences. As for being the big fish in the little pond, that is going to work only if we reliably win 10, 11, 12 games a year. The last time we did that I was a young man, and Erik was in grade school. Certainly, if we continue to schedule superior teams, especially away from home, we are not going to come close to 10 wins. Since 1976 and 1977 (both 10-1 seasons that went unrewarded by bowl invitations), the Aztecs have won 8 or more games in a single season exactly NINE times. Only twice in those years did the win total reach 9, in '10 and '12. Twice in 36 seasons. And in that time we have never really beaten a respected team. Kansas in '99 and Wazzou in '11 were pretty much doormats. With the new situation in which the rich schools will shower bennies on H.S. seniors, the personnel gap is only going to get wider. We need to keep improving the best we can under the circumstances and hope for the best. One thing that would help is to give up games such as last night's and schedule non-conference games against teams who will give us home-and-home contracts. Tulsa, Florida Atlantic, and Northern Illinois (which is scheduled) may not set the hearts of fans on fire, but be will have a good chance to win those games. We need to be the best we can in order to grab the one brass ring that P5 conferences have deigned to extend to the proletariat; that would be the chance to play in one of their big bowl games not part of the playoffs. Actually, if we could get in one of those, that would probably represent our greatest success since Coryell/Gilbert. We have hoped for more, but at some point reality has to come into the picture. AzWm
|
|
|
Post by 1969aztec on Sept 7, 2014 16:11:35 GMT -8
Very cogent analysis. Football much better than last decade. Four bowl games. Winning records. Expect future to be similar. Maybe a super run for a few years such as Boise. Always opportunity to reach access bowl. Most likely will not reach P5. But things change.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Sept 7, 2014 18:50:28 GMT -8
But CAN we get into a P5 conference going 7-4 or 8-4 every year (and losing to tougher competition because of 4th quarter meltdowns)? Is this all just an excercise in futility, or do you really, honestly believe that we can get in one of those conferences playing the way we play? Because we know we CAN be the big fish in the small pond if that's what we want. We CAN get 10 and 11 win seasons every year if whe schedule right. That just won't get us in a P5 conference... Another short-sighted analysis. Rutgers and Maryland proved thatvyou are wrong. Settling for the lower division is accepting the eventual strangulation leading to our relegation. TV money matters. Relationship to the P5 matters and eventually will in hoops too. Sent from my SM-G900V using proboards I'm not sure that I fully understand your point regarding Rutgers and Maryland. Both are located in areas of interest to the Big-10. Both are very old institutions with lots of tradition academically and, at least to a degree, athletically. Can't see how their situation has a whole lot to do with ours except to say that if your school is in an area that a different conference wants to exploit, you have a chance of getting a seat at the big-boys' table. San Diego State is basically of little or no interest to the PAC-12. They look down their noses at us academically (though in the case of a least a couple of PAC members, that is almost laughable). They think they already have a foothold in this county in terms of TV viewers and recruiting. I'm afraid they are correct on both counts. Being invited to join the PAC is not totally ridiculous, just very, very unlikely. As for the Big-12, we would not be that conference's first choice for expansion. Cincinnati and Houston, to name two, would be much more likely to get the call. We can argue all we want that creating a beachhead on the West Coast might be lucrative for the Big-12. But such a move would require out-of-the-box thinking that I don't associate with that Middle-Western crew. We are really hurt by our rather remote location, and there is nothing we can do about that. Even if we win and win and win, there is still no guarantee that we would be asked to join the Big-12. Look at BYU. Their credentials are in most areas far better than ours and they have been waiting fruitlessly by the telephone for years with nothing to show for their patience. (As for not playing on Sunday, what do you want to bet that the church fathers, should the Big-12 show interest, might not have a revelation indicating that the Sunday ban is no longer in force?) Of course we want to see our football program elevated to a more prestigious conference. But the facts indicate that such a happy occurrence is a very, very long shot. In that case, we are stuck in the small pond environment whether we like it or not. If that's our fate, why wouldn't we want at least to dominate our pond? AzWm
|
|
|
Post by sdmotohead on Sept 7, 2014 18:56:52 GMT -8
Don't we get money playing these P5 teams in their house?
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Sept 7, 2014 18:58:49 GMT -8
Don't we get money playing these P5 teams in their house? Of course. But is it worth it to completely turn off the locals that we so desperately need to fill up the seats at Qualcomm?? That's the question.
|
|
|
Post by sdmotohead on Sept 7, 2014 19:09:25 GMT -8
Why would playing a couple extra away games for $$ (more than we would get from the MW) turn away fans?
|
|
|
Post by zurac315 on Sept 7, 2014 19:55:19 GMT -8
If Rutgers and Maryland can get into the Big 10 SDSU has a chance to get into a P5 conference. It's all or nothing. Get into a P5 conference or fold up the tents. Why fold up the tents? Maybe some people would like the Aztecs to continue to play.
|
|
|
Post by zurac315 on Sept 7, 2014 19:58:03 GMT -8
Don't we get money playing these P5 teams in their house? Of course. But is it worth it to completely turn off the locals that we so desperately need to fill up the seats at Qualcomm?? That's the question. I don't know why last night's game would turn off the locals. It was exciting. For much of the game the Aztecs played very well. I know why it would turn off many on this board. After all, each season some on here predict 12 - 0. Who knows why? They just do.
|
|