|
Post by fredgarvinmp on May 20, 2015 14:38:28 GMT -8
Bottom line is there will be a small gain by the Aztecs IMO for sure if the Chargers left but let’s face it, MANY people just don't care about college athletics altogether (I know inside these walls it might be a bit of a shock). We have one of the better MBB programs in the country and MOST of my friends (40+ professionals who can afford to purchase season tickets), just don’t care about NCAA MBB. Same with college football. A shame to be sure as MBB is certainly MUCH more entertaining than the snooze fest that is the NBA.
Winning will certainly bring folks to the game, but the minute the Aztecs stop winning, crickets again. For example, if the MBB team became a middle of the road MW team (which someday it will let’s all face it), it will be real easy to get tickets at the window 5 min before gametime.
Just the way it is.
|
|
|
Post by rebar619 on May 20, 2015 15:00:57 GMT -8
Losing an NFL team takes away some sports history, enjoyment and fan focus from that sport. But once the shock and bitterness wears off, I think SDSU and especially Men's BB will rule this city for a big part of the sports calendar. The Chargers dominate the radio, TV and newspaper not just during the regular season but around NFL draft time and even the summer. No matter how great the Aztecs BB or FB games were on Saturdays up till the end of January, all sports guys could talk about on Monday was what the Chargers did that weekend. I am looking forward to having the city even more collectively behind Aztec teams when/if the Chargers go. The Men's BB program is far and away the most successful program in town, maybe now it will get the recognition it deserves. Can we please get away from this baseless premise? There is no evidence to suggest this will happen. As a matter of fact the only evidence shows that the NFL leaving town will not impact SDSU FB much at all. When LA lost the Rams and Raiders, UCLA and USC did not see bumps in attendance until they changed their marketing and performance on the field. This is two storied schools that play in a relevant conference. If they did not see much of a change why the hell would SDSU see any bump at all? We don't play in a relevant conference. Heck, we dont win our conference! WE LOSE TO NAVY ON OUR HOME FIELD!!!!!! Put a good product on the field then alumni and the community will come. The presence of the Chargers has nothing to do with SDSU success. To suggest otherwise is a fallacy.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on May 20, 2015 15:06:28 GMT -8
Yeah, if you read the whole conversation, that was my entire point. A lot of people won't accept Aztecs games as a substitute for Chargers games because they are completely different things. They're not RC Cola vs. Coke where people will say oh, you don't have coke yeah I'll have a RC instead. I was never debating the quality of the Chargers with respect to the NFL vs. the quality of the Aztecs with respect to MW/NCAA/whatever. The Aztecs won't need to win them all over right away ... if we're talking about people "fans" that don't go to games anyway (Chargers or otherwise) then do they really count? Are we talking about actual attendance at games or just plain fans in general? As I understand the numbers, only 20% of the general population are even sports fans to begin with ... of that 20% you must divide between the many sports (football, baseball, basketball, soccer, hockey, golf, horse racing, Nascar etc.) of those divisions, how many actually attend events in person? How many fans support a team for a reason other than geography? LA has no pro team right now and both UCLA and USC have seen gains in their attendance over the last 20 years ... not all those fans are alumni. If you want to bring in the Pac-12 is better argument, then shouldn't that have been true when there were NFL teams to begin with? The increase can indeed be attributed to the lack of an NFL team to compete with for entertainment dollars and support. Both teams were winning (a lot) as their attendance increased. In most cases, when the teams weren't as dominating, the attendance dropped off, albeit to levels the Aztecs can only dream of. I really would like to see what would happen if the Aztecs could put together a couple of 10 win seasons--I think many people would.
|
|
|
Post by mnico213 on May 20, 2015 15:06:34 GMT -8
Yeah, my main issue with this whole argument is the part in bold above. I just don't think it would be anywhere near that number. I think a very good SDSU team with the Chargers still here would draw significantly better than a decent/pretty good team with the Chargers gone. I think the impact of the Chargers leaving would be minimal at most in driving additional sales of tickets. Obviously, this is just my opinion, but the issue I took with the initial post was that it said it was simple economics that SDSU football will benefit from the Chargers leaving as RC Cola would with Pepsi and Coke gone and I think you are making a major assumption by assuming the substitutability of the Aztecs vs. the Chargers games would be at all similar. The problem is that the economics have been proven in other Cities that have lost their NFL teams and seen an increase in attention, attendance and support. While the reverse would also be true -- competition with an NFL team will see divided attention, attendance and support. So yes, simple economics. I'd like to see some other examples of this. Look at this article: sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=maisel_ivan&id=6695960 It seems to say the opposite of what you said about LA, where there was almost no impact for several years until the teams actually improved.
|
|
|
Post by aztecking on May 20, 2015 15:06:46 GMT -8
If you can't tell why someone would be more inclined support the pro team that represents their city than a college team in their city that they never attended, then I don't know what to say cause you're too far gone. The point is that sdsu has college grads here who have a connection to the school and, therefore, the athletic dept. No one ever said anything about non-sdsu grads supporting the school over the chargers. I think you may be too far gone. Dude, did you even read the first post on this thread? He said there would be a big uptick in support for SDSU sports if the Chargers leave. I'm sure there would be a small amount of additional support from alums who don't pay a lot of attention to SDSU right now. But other than that how many non-alums will SDSU actually attract?
|
|
|
Post by rebar619 on May 20, 2015 15:16:47 GMT -8
I don't believe so. If the Aztecs were in the pac fudge then maybe. The chances of us getting into the pac fudge slim to none. The early estimates are in and buying land from Qualcomm is 3 mil per acre. A decent stadium is 250 mil. Do the Aztecs really want to spend that much coin for a sport? Will it be even profitable? I don't the Chargers being here has much of an impact on the Aztecs as people think. I think the greatest impact has been the inability to establish a history of winning. I don't question whether it'll happen or not, but if SDSU had its own stadium that's the only way it'll maximize revenue from football. Paying rent to the city and not having parking and concession revenues, are killers. To add further insult we have a shit TV contract to boot. The only way we can overcome our present situation is to perform the way Boise State has over the years. It pains me to say this, but with our history and the lack of admin support you can forget about that. We're stuck with these goats and without that support I highly doubt we'll ever end up being their shepherd so to speak.
At this point in time I think this administration is taking a wait and see approach on how the college football landscape is going to change. So any thoughts about a stadium is really off the table, whether it's the Charger's or our own. IMO their only concern at present is having a stadium to play in. Nothing more, nothing less.
Nice job being a voice of sanity in this maelstrom.
|
|
|
Post by rebar619 on May 20, 2015 15:18:33 GMT -8
You have to compare the level at which the Chargers and the Aztecs are at. Hypothetically, the Chargers have the possibility of playing in the Super Bowl every year. The Aztecs could go undefeated and it won't matter. They can't compete for a National Championship. The Aztecs can win all the Holiday Bowls or Idaho Potato Bowls and it really won't mean much to the average fan, because honestly, outside of the top 4-5 bowl games, who cares? If they were competing for a National Championship or at least a major bowl game, then you would see fans across the city get excited about the team. NCAA basketball is a different story because of the NCAA tournament. That gets a lot more people revved up because SDSU has a shot to be a national champion. Bingo was his name-O
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on May 20, 2015 15:18:44 GMT -8
it's not like the CHARGERS are leaving the planet. EVEN if they leave San Diego. The sports talk and focus will STILL be on them as the United States is driven by the NFL. They are only moving a hundred miles north. I WISH the Aztecs will benefit if the Chargers leave. I don't see the upside. Does Mighty 1090 constantly talk Lakers basketball?
|
|
|
Post by rebar619 on May 20, 2015 15:24:22 GMT -8
Yeah, if you read the whole conversation, that was my entire point. A lot of people won't accept Aztecs games as a substitute for Chargers games because they are completely different things. They're not RC Cola vs. Coke where people will say oh, you don't have coke yeah I'll have a RC instead. I was never debating the quality of the Chargers with respect to the NFL vs. the quality of the Aztecs with respect to MW/NCAA/whatever. The Aztecs won't need to win them all over right away ... if we're talking about people "fans" that don't go to games anyway (Chargers or otherwise) then do they really count? Are we talking about actual attendance at games or just plain fans in general? As I understand the numbers, only 20% of the general population are even sports fans to begin with ... of that 20% you must divide between the many sports (football, baseball, basketball, soccer, hockey, golf, horse racing, Nascar etc.) of those divisions, how many actually attend events in person? How many fans support a team for a reason other than geography? LA has no pro team right now and both UCLA and USC have seen gains in their attendance over the last 20 years ... not all those fans are alumni. If you want to bring in the Pac-12 is better argument, then shouldn't that have been true when there were NFL teams to begin with? The increase can indeed be attributed to the lack of an NFL team to compete with for entertainment dollars and support. The only way your argument will have any basis is if you see UCLA and USC have a drop in attendance when the NFL returns. Over the 5 years after the NFL left LA there was no change in UCLA/USC attendance. There was a bump afterwards that both universities attribute to their marketing and performance on the field, NOT the removal of the NFL from LA.
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on May 20, 2015 15:26:05 GMT -8
Losing an NFL team takes away some sports history, enjoyment and fan focus from that sport. But once the shock and bitterness wears off, I think SDSU and especially Men's BB will rule this city for a big part of the sports calendar. The Chargers dominate the radio, TV and newspaper not just during the regular season but around NFL draft time and even the summer. No matter how great the Aztecs BB or FB games were on Saturdays up till the end of January, all sports guys could talk about on Monday was what the Chargers did that weekend. I am looking forward to having the city even more collectively behind Aztec teams when/if the Chargers go. The Men's BB program is far and away the most successful program in town, maybe now it will get the recognition it deserves. Can we please get away from this baseless premise? There is no evidence to suggest this will happen. As a matter of fact the only evidence shows that the NFL leaving town will not impact SDSU FB much at all. When LA lost the Rams and Raiders, UCLA and USC did not see bumps in attendance until they changed their marketing and performance on the field. This is two storied schools that play in a relevant conference. If they did not see much of a change why the hell would SDSU see any bump at all? We don't play in a relevant conference. Heck, we dont win our conference! WE LOSE TO NAVY ON OUR HOME FIELD!!!!!! Put a good product on the field then alumni and the community will come. The presence of the Chargers has nothing to do with SDSU success. To suggest otherwise is a fallacy. I bust you on this every time you make this claim but the facts don't back it up. Here is the effect on attendance on SC & UCLA for more than just the immediate season following the Rams & Raiders departure. The Rams were in LA from 1946-1994 and the Raiders were in LA from 1982-94 so here is the home attendance for UCLA/USC during those 13 seasons where the two local college teams competed with 2 NFL franchises and then the equivalent number of seasons following their departure as the only game in town. 1982-1994 UCLA Avg Attendance 54,412 1995-2007 UCLA Avg Attendance 62,058 14% increase 1982-1994 USC Avg Attendance 61,769 1995-2007 USC Avg Attendance 65,305 5.7% increase Also, the 20 years since the departure of the NFL has been the most successful stretch of attendance for both programs in their histories. Page 119 of the UCLA media guide (link below) shows UCLA attendance history. www.uclabruins.com/fls/30500/pdf/14_FB_MediaGuide.pdf?&&SPSID=749897&SPID=126928&DB_OEM_ID=30500Page 186 of the USC Media Guide (link below) shows UCLA attendance history. grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/usc/sports/m-footbl/auto_pdf/2014-15/misc_non_event/2014-fb-media-guide.pdf
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2015 15:33:14 GMT -8
I have no idea what USC or UCLA's historical attendance figures for the 90's were...but in the case of USC it is interesting that they were pretty awful from the early 80's to around 95/96...
If nothing else the Raiders and Rams departure coincided with USC's resurgence...coincidence? Probably...definitely...but still interesting.
|
|
|
Post by mnico213 on May 20, 2015 15:33:50 GMT -8
Can we please get away from this baseless premise? There is no evidence to suggest this will happen. As a matter of fact the only evidence shows that the NFL leaving town will not impact SDSU FB much at all. When LA lost the Rams and Raiders, UCLA and USC did not see bumps in attendance until they changed their marketing and performance on the field. This is two storied schools that play in a relevant conference. If they did not see much of a change why the hell would SDSU see any bump at all? We don't play in a relevant conference. Heck, we dont win our conference! WE LOSE TO NAVY ON OUR HOME FIELD!!!!!! Put a good product on the field then alumni and the community will come. The presence of the Chargers has nothing to do with SDSU success. To suggest otherwise is a fallacy. I bust you on this every time you make this claim but the facts don't back it up. Here is the effect on attendance on SC & UCLA for more than just the immediate season following the Rams & Raiders departure. The Rams were in LA from 1946-1994 and the Raiders were in LA from 1982-94 so here is the home attendance for UCLA/USC during those 13 seasons where the two local college teams competed with 2 NFL franchises and then the equivalent number of seasons following their departure as the only game in town. 1982-1994 UCLA Avg Attendance 54,412 1995-2007 UCLA Avg Attendance 62,058 14% increase 1982-1994 USC Avg Attendance 61,769 1995-2007 USC Avg Attendance 65,305 5.7% increase Also, the 20 years since the departure of the NFL has been the most successful stretch of attendance for both programs in their histories. Page 119 of the UCLA media guide (link below) shows UCLA attendance history. www.uclabruins.com/fls/30500/pdf/14_FB_MediaGuide.pdf?&&SPSID=749897&SPID=126928&DB_OEM_ID=30500Page 186 of the USC Media Guide (link below) shows UCLA attendance history. grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/usc/sports/m-footbl/auto_pdf/2014-15/misc_non_event/2014-fb-media-guide.pdf The 5.7% increase for USC is hardly a big deal and all it took was clicking on your link to see that yep, the 2002-2007 years really drive that increase and just happen to coincide with a massive improvement in the team's success.
|
|
|
Post by mnico213 on May 20, 2015 15:42:11 GMT -8
Can we please get away from this baseless premise? There is no evidence to suggest this will happen. As a matter of fact the only evidence shows that the NFL leaving town will not impact SDSU FB much at all. When LA lost the Rams and Raiders, UCLA and USC did not see bumps in attendance until they changed their marketing and performance on the field. This is two storied schools that play in a relevant conference. If they did not see much of a change why the hell would SDSU see any bump at all? We don't play in a relevant conference. Heck, we dont win our conference! WE LOSE TO NAVY ON OUR HOME FIELD!!!!!! Put a good product on the field then alumni and the community will come. The presence of the Chargers has nothing to do with SDSU success. To suggest otherwise is a fallacy. I bust you on this every time you make this claim but the facts don't back it up. Here is the effect on attendance on SC & UCLA for more than just the immediate season following the Rams & Raiders departure. The Rams were in LA from 1946-1994 and the Raiders were in LA from 1982-94 so here is the home attendance for UCLA/USC during those 13 seasons where the two local college teams competed with 2 NFL franchises and then the equivalent number of seasons following their departure as the only game in town. 1982-1994 UCLA Avg Attendance 54,412 1995-2007 UCLA Avg Attendance 62,058 14% increase 1982-1994 USC Avg Attendance 61,769 1995-2007 USC Avg Attendance 65,305 5.7% increase Also, the 20 years since the departure of the NFL has been the most successful stretch of attendance for both programs in their histories. Page 119 of the UCLA media guide (link below) shows UCLA attendance history. www.uclabruins.com/fls/30500/pdf/14_FB_MediaGuide.pdf?&&SPSID=749897&SPID=126928&DB_OEM_ID=30500Page 186 of the USC Media Guide (link below) shows UCLA attendance history. grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/usc/sports/m-footbl/auto_pdf/2014-15/misc_non_event/2014-fb-media-guide.pdf Oh and the UCLA attendance from 1969-1981 47,624 UCLA attendance 1982-1994 54,412 14% increase So, are we really going to say that the second increase which was exactly the same as the previous 13 years is due to the NFL leaving?
|
|
|
Post by aztecmusician on May 20, 2015 15:55:43 GMT -8
If the Chargers leave San Diego it is definitely not a good sign for the local sports business world. It only shows that San Diego is a toxic sports town.
Being the only game in town will not make the Aztecs popular among San Diegans only winning will do that. By the way, for what it's worth, I believe that the Chargers will remain in San Diego. The Carson site will be built on a toxic waste dump. The environmental complications of building a stadium at that location will be monumental. The hiring of Carmen Policy is window dressing, a sham to scare the City of San Diego into acting. It's worked BTW, we now have a design and the funding strategy to make it happen.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on May 20, 2015 16:04:44 GMT -8
Don't underestimate the change in sports fan culture over the past 15-20 years since the NFL has left LA: fantasy football. It has already reached amazing numbers and keeps growing.
I'm leaning towards not following the NFL at all if the Chargers leave but there's a part of me that might continue following the NFL through fantasy football. I would have to take a few years hiatus first because I would probably be too disappointed and/or hateful of the NFL before I could start to get over it. But the NFL is undisputed king of sports in America. If the Chargers leave, I think most fans here would still follow the NFL and a lot of them would do so because of fantasy football, football pools, betting on games, etc.
To those that think that massive amounts of people with no affiliation to SDSU would suddenly become fans, you need to take your homer goggles off.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on May 20, 2015 16:26:03 GMT -8
San Diego will only back a winner, and a winner is not part of the MWC and never will be. (minus basketball) Yeah those Boise State Broncos are a bunch of losers. "One of the most successful football programs of all time, Boise State has the third highest historical winning percentage among NCAA Division I-A football programs after Notre Dame and Michigan.[1] Eight different coaches have led Boise State to 10 or more wins in twenty-one different seasons.[2] The program is 10–5 in bowl games since 1999, including a 3–0 record in the Fiesta Bowl." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_win-loss_recordsLol. Try again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2015 16:31:11 GMT -8
I almost forgot most of the hardcore SDSU football fans(i.e. Don't need to be playing a P5 or in the hunt for a BCS game to get excited for their team) abandoned this site. No offense to the hardcore fans still here BTW.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on May 20, 2015 16:41:11 GMT -8
If you can't tell why someone would be more inclined support the pro team that represents their city than a college team in their city that they never attended, then I don't know what to say cause you're too far gone. So, you are saying San Diego State University, the only D1 college football program in San Diego, does not represent our city? Even if I didn't graduate from SDSU I would still follow the program because I am a fan of college football not NFL football.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2015 16:47:16 GMT -8
I don't think anyone really believes that a charger departure will lead to a meaningful change in Aztec fb attendance. That is, unless sdsu builds a stadium in national city.
|
|
|
Post by aztecking on May 20, 2015 18:41:28 GMT -8
If you can't tell why someone would be more inclined support the pro team that represents their city than a college team in their city that they never attended, then I don't know what to say cause you're too far gone. So, you are saying San Diego State University, the only D1 college football program in San Diego, does not represent our city? Even if I didn't graduate from SDSU I would still follow the program because I am a fan of college football not NFL football. For people without a direct connection to the school it doesn't represent the city the way a pro team does.
|
|