Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2014 8:41:38 GMT -8
It seems to me that Basketball should have some value to the Big 12, and Basketball put our name on a National scale. Every know the top 25 schools. Our competition does not have a top 20 basketball team. So what if we get to the final 4. Everyone will know us. On a minuscule level, the same is true of baseball, which the B12 actually cares about. That sport has been the most underachieving on campus but I'm optimistic that with a true coaching professional taking over, the team is going to be much better in a couple years. (God bless you Tony, R.I.P.)
|
|
|
Post by adammclane on Nov 20, 2014 9:43:21 GMT -8
He went into depth, the question came from an attendee. I won't share the second half of it because it wasn't clear what was public and what was not. The first part he has talked about before, that the school has commissioned a study of the Aztec viewership on TV and been very pleased. The assumption had been that we get beat by PAC-12 schools on TV in a lot of CA markets. So far, that's not true in SD county and some other markets. We do pretty well and having that data will help our case if we make an official bid to join another conference. It isn't just about the quality of your football team, it's about the viewership too. Please tell us you aren't trying to say that they're mutually exclusive. No, but I am saying that our football program, in its current state, is not hurting us either. Viewership and interest in the Aztec brand is way up. Sure, a 10 win season would be nice and would do wonders at filling the stadium and expanding that reach. (I think we're a good QB away from that right now.) But the current administration has put us in the expansion conversation and that's about all you can ask for. I don't think you have to be considered an immediate contender in FB to get into a P5 conference. You have to look at it like a college president since it's ultimately up to 12 college presidents and the commissioner. Is SDSU going to expand the viewership and reach of B12 football and basketball for the sake of increasing revenue for the group? Is SDSU prepared to invest in developing that product further with the influx of $$$? Does SDSU have the right administrators and athletic department on board? Are their academics going to help the conference? Stuff like that. If you look at it purely through the scope of football... I don't think the B12 would be interested in a contender. They'd want someone like SDSU who won't embarrass the conference, might win the occasional big game, and be a great destination for fans of other teams to come to. The entire region would benefit if we got into a conference that traveled. Not sure if you've been in a P5 town for a football weekend, but those teams travel really, really well. You know darn well that if WVU came to town every 2 seasons that folks would love to come here.
|
|
|
Post by AztecCamera on Nov 20, 2014 9:54:44 GMT -8
If we were a misconceived pompous school like BYU, we could sue the PAC 12 for not letting us in. Can you imagine what a powerhouse we would be if we kept our homegrown talent at home?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2014 10:37:45 GMT -8
I don't think you have to be considered an immediate contender in FB to get into a P5 conference. You have to look at it like a college president since it's ultimately up to 12 college presidents and the commissioner. Is SDSU going to expand the viewership and reach of B12 football and basketball for the sake of increasing revenue for the group? Is SDSU prepared to invest in developing that product further with the influx of $$$? Does SDSU have the right administrators and athletic department on board? Are their academics going to help the conference? Stuff like that. If you look at it purely through the scope of football... I don't think the B12 would be interested in a contender. They'd want someone like SDSU who won't embarrass the conference, might win the occasional big game, and be a great destination for fans of other teams to come to. Since advent of the BCS, the B12 has lost several key members and replaced them with only two: TCU and WVU. In the case of TCU, that school was coming off a 7-year run of 77 football wins, including six bowl victories. In the case of WVU, the Mountaineers were coming off a 10-year run of 95 victories. So history says the first highlighted statement is simply wrong. As to the second, maybe fans would want to come to Ft. Worth since it's virtually next door to Dallas but why on earth would anyone want to travel to Morgantown? I've never had the displeasure but my friend's daughter went to school there and she tells me the place is a major dump. As L.A.Aztec put it, if the B12 substantially expands and SDSU isn't offered membership, it will be simply because our football program has not achieved to anywhere near the level of TCU and WVU. And as I said, it's as simple as that.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Nov 20, 2014 10:44:33 GMT -8
5-5 just doesn't look that sexy. Bingo. That is 5 wins against the dregs of Division 1 football too. Hardly the kind of thing which would attract the Big 12 to us. As long as our administration continues to show absolutely no commitment to the football program you can forget all hope of ever even being considered by the Big 12 even with all the success our basketball program has had. As I mentioned in another thread, Colorado State understands the urgency of the situation and they are currently doing everything in their power to place themselves in the best position possible in case the Big 12 decides to expand. Our administration, on the other hand, is doing squat. They don't even provide enough funding to our football program to field a full coaching staff. As long as our administration continues to neglect the football program, any talk about the possibilities of being invited to the Big 12 (if they expand) is a complete waste of time. Our administration is satisfied just staying in an obscure and weak conference where you are invited to bottom feeder bowls where the school loses money instead of receiving money. It is frustrating to see other universities who understand the urgency of the situation and are trying to do everything in their power to be as attractive to the Big 12 while our administration just throws up their hands and plays the defeatist. And that, sports fans, is what I have been fearing for a long time. Boise and, it appears, Colorado State understand that a football program can be successful only if there is a full-bore commitment given to it by the school's administration. Look at the number of MWC schools with a winning record this year. Then look at our 5-5. As I have posted numerous times, what are those other schools doing that we are not? Whatever it is, it's working. Meanwhile this program drifts . . . downward, I'm afraid. It's about leadership. And SDSU appears not to have the kind of leadership needed to build a program that more often than not wins 10 games and makes the Top-25. It appears that, ever since the stupid firing of Claude Gilbert, that's the kind of leadership that has been lacking on the Mesa. If the quality of school leadership does not change, neither will the W/L record change. AzWm
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2014 10:51:22 GMT -8
I don't think you have to be considered an immediate contender in FB to get into a P5 conference. You have to look at it like a college president since it's ultimately up to 12 college presidents and the commissioner. Is SDSU going to expand the viewership and reach of B12 football and basketball for the sake of increasing revenue for the group? Is SDSU prepared to invest in developing that product further with the influx of $$$? Does SDSU have the right administrators and athletic department on board? Are their academics going to help the conference? Stuff like that. If you look at it purely through the scope of football... I don't think the B12 would be interested in a contender. They'd want someone like SDSU who won't embarrass the conference, might win the occasional big game, and be a great destination for fans of other teams to come to. Since advent of the BCS, the B12 has lost several key members and replaced them with only two: TCU and WVU. In the case of TCU, that school was coming off a 7-year run of 77 football wins, including six bowl victories. In the case of WVU, the Mountaineers were coming off a 10-year run of 95 victories. So history says the first highlighted statement is simply wrong. As to the second, maybe fans would want to come to Ft. Worth since it's virtually next door to Dallas but why on earth would anyone want to travel to Morgantown? I've never had the displeasure but my friend's daughter went to school there and she tells me the place is a major dump. As L.A.Aztec put it, if the B12 substantially expands and SDSU isn't offered membership, it will be simply because our football program has not achieved to anywhere near the level of TCU and WVU. And as I said, it's as simple as that. I love how (in general) people on here constantly talk in absolutes, like that is how the world works.
SGF, you are trying to prove your point beyond any shadow of doubt with a sample size of exactly two. I might add you do this with absolutely zero knowledge of what the B12's decision was actually based on (I will retract this entire post if you were in the meetings when they decided who to invite into their club.)
Look I will admit I have no idea if SDSU would even be considered for membership into the B12 or not but my guess, and it's a guess - not stated as an absolute- is that it is not solely based on how many games the football team wins... in my mind, if it were, BSU would have already been invited to the club. (but sure, I will admit it sure wouldn't hurt SDSU's chances if they were to go 12-0.)
And for all those who don't think youth and key injuries have a major effect on the results in football please compare last year's AF team to this year's. I will add I also don't know if the Aztec's will have that kind of turn around next year but it certainly is possible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2014 10:57:18 GMT -8
I didn't speak in "absolutes" any more than the guy whose argument I refuted. As to the sample size, I used what was available in doing so.
I'll also admit that I was speculating in saying football success was the main criterion in the admission of TCU and WVU. However, assuming you think I'm off base with such speculation, rather than just saying so, explain why. In other words, explain why the B12 may have wanted TCU and WVU if it wasn't for their football programs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2014 11:09:57 GMT -8
I didn't speak in "absolutes" any more than the guy whose argument I refuted. As to the sample size, I used what was available in doing so. I'll also admit that I was speculating in saying football success was the main criterion in the admission of TCU and WVU. However, assuming you think I'm off base with such speculation, rather than just saying so, explain why. In other words, explain why the B12 may have wanted TCU and WVU if it wasn't for their football programs. SGF, I don't want to get into a pissing match with you on this. It's just not that important to me to win an argument (not implying it is to you - just saying it's not to me). I commented on your posted because the way it was written came across to me like you were speaking in absolutes. If you don't feel you were, fine.
I pointed out that a sample size of two doesn't exactly prove anything statistically because it doesn't - even if you only have two samples to draw from.
I do not profess to know why the B12 did or didn't invite teams into their club and I certainly don't need to make up reasons (or speculate) why to make my post any more or less valid. Look, I know you spend hours on the internet reading all kinds of stuff on expansion so I am sure you know more than I but that doesn't mean I have to believe you because you say football success is the main criteria. I would be willing to guess that absolutely no one here knows the exact reasons especially me.
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Nov 20, 2014 11:11:16 GMT -8
B12 is not going to expand unless forced by the play off committee . The WVU AD sits on the committee and will surely ask ,if a "championship game " is the game breaker ,. If so they either present the thought "if we have a game at the end of the season between our #1 and # 2 team will that do it ? As they have said if the top 2 teams in a conference are both in the same division what does a championship game prove for the other conferences ? It Should be the top two rated teams in the conference . Doesn't almost every one agree there will be expansion of the playoffs, if so will that be before B12 would be forced to expand .? If there is expansion of the Playoffs to more teams then there could be more money for B12 and they maybe willing to expand ( or we can hope )
See the most important issue as MONEY for B12 and how they can get the highest amount for their current members. Is it from more viewers from TV or as last resort ,.Do they allow the final 6 schools they want to consider submit a bid as to how Low of a % money slice does a new school feel they deserve to receive from the TV money deal ? What would be your answer ? It's all about the MONEY not the football .
For those that say it is what our AD and President are saying about football in the press, doubt it talk is cheep ask most politicians. BSU and BYU talk a good game but ,It could be about the TV viewers and that presentation that could be vital .Money talks and as we have seen . The B12 has the leverage and they are going to set the rules IF they are forced to expand. The older schools do not need better football teams,/ competition, they want more revenue from TV , Lower % pay out to new schools , added recruiting ? venues that are easy to travel to and facilities for those traveling there, .... or their own priorities
|
|
|
Post by retiredaztec on Nov 20, 2014 11:15:17 GMT -8
I didn't speak in "absolutes" any more than the guy whose argument I refuted. As to the sample size, I used what was available in doing so. I'll also admit that I was speculating in saying football success was the main criterion in the admission of TCU and WVU. However, assuming you think I'm off base with such speculation, rather than just saying so, explain why. In other words, explain why the B12 may have wanted TCU and WVU if it wasn't for their football programs. If I may chime in towards the end of this song, I can't speak for WVU, (though I strongly suspect), but regarding TCU, with a brother-in-law an alumni and avid booster, I know that winning and community support go hand in hand in their eventual, (and for boosters long overdue), admission to the B12. Here in Dumpwater, located at the heart of Wanker County, Utah, the University of Utah also had success on the field, as well as in the stands, as well as the team shops prior to their admission to the PAC-10. I'm hard pressed to think State football has had any real success in any of the three categories that would justify a leap to the next level.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Nov 20, 2014 11:17:19 GMT -8
I don't think you have to be considered an immediate contender in FB to get into a P5 conference. You have to look at it like a college president since it's ultimately up to 12 college presidents and the commissioner. Is SDSU going to expand the viewership and reach of B12 football and basketball for the sake of increasing revenue for the group? Is SDSU prepared to invest in developing that product further with the influx of $$$? Does SDSU have the right administrators and athletic department on board? Are their academics going to help the conference? Stuff like that. If you look at it purely through the scope of football... I don't think the B12 would be interested in a contender. They'd want someone like SDSU who won't embarrass the conference, might win the occasional big game, and be a great destination for fans of other teams to come to. Since advent of the BCS, the B12 has lost several key members and replaced them with only two: TCU and WVU. In the case of TCU, that school was coming off a 7-year run of 77 football wins, including six bowl victories. In the case of WVU, the Mountaineers were coming off a 10-year run of 95 victories. So history says the first highlighted statement is simply wrong. As to the second, maybe fans would want to come to Ft. Worth since it's virtually next door to Dallas but why on earth would anyone want to travel to Morgantown? I've never had the displeasure but my friend's daughter went to school there and she tells me the place is a major dump. As L.A.Aztec put it, if the B12 substantially expands and SDSU isn't offered membership, it will be simply because our football program has not achieved to anywhere near the level of TCU and WVU. And as I said, it's as simple as that. I agree. Look at the schools in the MWC who are doing well this year. . . Colorado State...9-1 Boise State.... ...8-2 Utah State.... ....8-3 Air Force..... .....8-2 Nevada...... ......6-4 Is any serious fan going to tell me that SDSU should not be doing as well or better than those schools? Colorado State might well end the MWC season with a 12-1 record with an innovation to a P5 bowl. The next three schools all have a chance to win 10 games. Meanwhile, we are in danger of finishing the regular season at .500, the first non-winning season since 2009. Something is very wrong with this program. It's leadership, leadership from the top down. Since the stupid firing of Claude Gilbert in l980, this program has had inadequate leadership. How else does one explain going from 17 straight winning seasons (1961-1977) to just 14 winning season out of 36 (1978-2013)? SDSU has many major assets: Great destination city, virgin territory for the Big-12, great local recruiting prospects, improved educational standing, nationally respected basketball program, etc. The one area that is deficient happens to be one of the most critical: quality of the football program. Unless the leadership from the top down improves, neither will our chances of getting a Big-12 invitation. AzWm
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Nov 20, 2014 11:23:12 GMT -8
Add to my last post. Adequate leadership would mean looking at the program and admitting that Rocky Long, though he has contributed to the school, is simply not going to get the job done. We have people who think that they are getting a bargain, not having to pay for a separate DC. It is not a bargain.
We should think about bringing in a new coach for 2015, but he's got to be a program-changer. I know it will be difficult to do that, but, as even I am tired of saying it, if we don't make a change, we will continue to get what we've been getting. What we've been getting is not good enough. And, I think, not what this school is capable of producing.
AzWm
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2014 11:30:15 GMT -8
If over the next half dozen years preceding B12 expansion - which shouldn't be expected any time soon - SDSU football rises to the level of what TCU and WVU football was before those schools were offered membership and yet SDSU still isn't offered, I'll readily acknowledge I was wrong about its importance, as I'm sure L.A.Aztec and others will too. Or if SDSU football is still as mediocre as it is today yet we are nevertheless offered B12 admission, I'll similarly admit I was wrong. I'll also acknowledge that if it wasn't the B12 we were debating but rather potential membership in the Pac-12, SDSU could easily be denied admission strictly on the basis of academics regardless of our football prowess. However, as exemplified by WVU, whose academics are no better than SDSU's, the B12 really doesn't care all that much about that factor. (Might hurt Boise but SDSU's academics are plenty good enough for B12 admission.) But right now, from what is admittedly a small sample size, it sure appears as though it would behoove us to greatly improve our football team if we realistically want to gain B12 admission. I'm sorry if that sounds depressing to some but that's how I view it.
|
|
|
Post by retiredaztec on Nov 20, 2014 11:52:57 GMT -8
If over the next half dozen years preceding B12 expansion - which shouldn't be expected any time soon - SDSU football rises to the level of what TCU and WVU football was before those schools were offered membership and yet SDSU still isn't offered, I'll readily acknowledge I was wrong about its importance, as I'm sure L.A.Aztec and others will too. Or if SDSU football is still as mediocre as it is today yet we are nevertheless offered B12 admission, I'll similarly admit I was wrong. I'll also acknowledge that if it wasn't the B12 we were debating but rather potential membership in the Pac-12, SDSU could easily be denied admission strictly on the basis of academics regardless of our football prowess. However, as exemplified by WVU, whose academics are no better than SDSU's, the B12 really doesn't care all that much about that factor. (Might hurt Boise but SDSU's academics are plenty good enough for B12 admission.) But right now, from what is admittedly a small sample size, it sure appears as though it would behoove us to greatly improve our football team if we realistically want to gain B12 admission. I'm sorry if that sounds depressing to some but that's how I view it. Or this. If SDSU rises to the level of TCU on the football field and still averages 30-35 thousand a game, it's time to pull the plug. Just figure out a way to get Aztec football to that level. No problem. And you're still talking about a conference that for 2014 has averaged 55,990 per game with the low ball downtrodden Kansas at 34,077. The B12 doesn't need another one of those.
|
|
|
Post by rebar619 on Nov 20, 2014 12:07:44 GMT -8
Add to my last post. Adequate leadership would mean looking at the program and admitting that Rocky Long, though he has contributed to the school, is simply not going to get the job done. We have people who think that they are getting a bargain, not having to pay for a separate DC. It is not a bargain. We should think about bringing in a new coach for 2015, but he's got to be a program-changer. I know it will be difficult to do that, but, as even I am tired of saying it, if we don't make a change, we will continue to get what we've been getting. What we've been getting is not good enough. And, I think, not what this school is capable of producing. AzWm Careful AW, the last time I voiced that same opinion I had pitchforks and torches coming at me screaming that I was no fan of SDSU. I love Rocky, but think we need to look for the next best thing. Regarding expansion, I have no problem speaking in absolutes and saying the success on the football field is the only thing holding SDSU back from a P5 invite. To suggest that SDSU lacks anything else is laughable. SDSU has the academics, market, elite basketball and other great assets. Since I highly doubt any of us have a few million to donate to the football program, does anyone have any thoughts on how to impress upon the administration the importance of elevating the football program? I doubt me walking into President Hirshman's office and imploring him to do so will work - even if I drop a "don't you know who I am?".
|
|
|
Post by adammclane on Nov 20, 2014 13:04:19 GMT -8
If over the next half dozen years preceding B12 expansion - which shouldn't be expected any time soon - SDSU football rises to the level of what TCU and WVU football was before those schools were offered membership and yet SDSU still isn't offered, I'll readily acknowledge I was wrong about its importance, as I'm sure L.A.Aztec and others will too. Or if SDSU football is still as mediocre as it is today yet we are nevertheless offered B12 admission, I'll similarly admit I was wrong. I'll also acknowledge that if it wasn't the B12 we were debating but rather potential membership in the Pac-12, SDSU could easily be denied admission strictly on the basis of academics regardless of our football prowess. However, as exemplified by WVU, whose academics are no better than SDSU's, the B12 really doesn't care all that much about that factor. (Might hurt Boise but SDSU's academics are plenty good enough for B12 admission.) But right now, from what is admittedly a small sample size, it sure appears as though it would behoove us to greatly improve our football team if we realistically want to gain B12 admission. I'm sorry if that sounds depressing to some but that's how I view it. Or this. If SDSU rises to the level of TCU on the football field and still averages 30-35 thousand a game, it's time to pull the plug. Just figure out a way to get Aztec football to that level. No problem. And you're still talking about a conference that for 2014 has averaged 55,990 per game with the low ball downtrodden Kansas at 34,077. The B12 doesn't need another one of those. I don't think game attendance is a big measuring stick. Obviously, if we played Oklahoma we'd sell more tickets than if we play Idaho. The football team is competitive, that's what matters. With the budget we have and the utter lack of football facilities, there isn't much more we can do but sell a vision. If we had the necessary funding for development and stability at the head coaching spot we have a proven track record as an excellent athletic department.
|
|
|
Post by adammclane on Nov 20, 2014 13:04:57 GMT -8
Add to my last post. Adequate leadership would mean looking at the program and admitting that Rocky Long, though he has contributed to the school, is simply not going to get the job done. We have people who think that they are getting a bargain, not having to pay for a separate DC. It is not a bargain. We should think about bringing in a new coach for 2015, but he's got to be a program-changer. I know it will be difficult to do that, but, as even I am tired of saying it, if we don't make a change, we will continue to get what we've been getting. What we've been getting is not good enough. And, I think, not what this school is capable of producing. AzWm Careful AW, the last time I voiced that same opinion I had pitchforks and torches coming at me screaming that I was no fan of SDSU. I love Rocky, but think we need to look for the next best thing. Regarding expansion, I have no problem speaking in absolutes and saying the success on the football field is the only thing holding SDSU back from a P5 invite. To suggest that SDSU lacks anything else is laughable. SDSU has the academics, market, elite basketball and other great assets. Since I highly doubt any of us have a few million to donate to the football program, does anyone have any thoughts on how to impress upon the administration the importance of elevating the football program? I doubt me walking into President Hirshman's office and imploring him to do so will work - even if I drop a "don't you know who I am?". You don't need just millionaires. Every one can help.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Nov 20, 2014 13:20:43 GMT -8
Or this. If SDSU rises to the level of TCU on the football field and still averages 30-35 thousand a game, it's time to pull the plug. Just figure out a way to get Aztec football to that level. No problem. And you're still talking about a conference that for 2014 has averaged 55,990 per game with the low ball downtrodden Kansas at 34,077. The B12 doesn't need another one of those. I don't think game attendance is a big measuring stick. Obviously, if we played Oklahoma we'd sell more tickets than if we play Idaho. The football team is competitive, that's what matters. With the budget we have and the utter lack of football facilities, there isn't much more we can do but sell a vision. If we had the necessary funding for development and stability at the head coaching spot we have a proven track record as an excellent athletic department. But--in my opinion--being "competitive" has many facets, yes? Seems that for most on this board, competitive means a team struggling for the top 4 to 6 spots in this woeful conference. What's more, that definition barely brings fans to the games. For me, the football team will only be "competitive" when it actually wins the conference, beats P5 teams regularly who are ranked, and makes news on a national level. Until then, "competitive" remains a word, inappropriate in any sentence containing SDSU football. Sorry.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2014 13:24:46 GMT -8
Add to my last post. Adequate leadership would mean looking at the program and admitting that Rocky Long, though he has contributed to the school, is simply not going to get the job done. We have people who think that they are getting a bargain, not having to pay for a separate DC. It is not a bargain. We should think about bringing in a new coach for 2015, but he's got to be a program-changer. I know it will be difficult to do that, but, as even I am tired of saying it, if we don't make a change, we will continue to get what we've been getting. What we've been getting is not good enough. And, I think, not what this school is capable of producing. AzWm Oh for Odin's sake William CSU has a big year with a solid senior QB and it is a semi dynasty? When he gradates then lets see if it is not another case of Fresburg in Carr's senior year.Football has been draining from the general funds and student fees for a long time. We had 10 win season under Claude Gilbert did it lead to perenial championships? Replace Rocky in 2015 that's just fantasy and nuts. "he's got to be a program-changer" Seriously who is he for certain a nd where is the money for him? the program is going in the right direction though mighty slowly.Rocky needs to produce a big winning season next year if not then we will see what the administraion decides.I keep asking the same question in the fire Rocky now crowd never answers it. By what objective measure do you think San Diego State should be able to recruit and consistently dominate the teams in this conference. We do have a football reputation but it's very old, were California State University school with very limiting finances. We don't have a Phil Knight, or even made John Moores. Our facilities are decent by G5 standards but nothing terrific. We play in a hugely oversized stadium that makes 30,000 fans look like 5000. We have raised student fees about as high as anyone can tolerate given the economics of the times. This constant mantra that the President and athletic department doesn't care about football because they haven't poured money into it .(that they don't have) is like your princess daughter telling you Daddy why can't you buy me a new Mercedes-Benz, you must not love me. I deserve better than a two-year-old Ford escape. Can't you get another job?
|
|
|
Post by rebar619 on Nov 20, 2014 13:48:20 GMT -8
Careful AW, the last time I voiced that same opinion I had pitchforks and torches coming at me screaming that I was no fan of SDSU. I love Rocky, but think we need to look for the next best thing. Regarding expansion, I have no problem speaking in absolutes and saying the success on the football field is the only thing holding SDSU back from a P5 invite. To suggest that SDSU lacks anything else is laughable. SDSU has the academics, market, elite basketball and other great assets. Since I highly doubt any of us have a few million to donate to the football program, does anyone have any thoughts on how to impress upon the administration the importance of elevating the football program? I doubt me walking into President Hirshman's office and imploring him to do so will work - even if I drop a "don't you know who I am?". You don't need just millionaires. Every one can help. Thats really what I was getting at. The football program really needs a rallying point for people to donate to. It is tough for people to just chuck money at a program and not have a clear idea of what they are paying for. That is where the administration comes in. They have to drum up support for the program and raise funds for specific items such as coaches salaries, training equipment/meals, facilities, etc.
|
|