|
Post by missiontrails on Aug 26, 2015 9:34:56 GMT -8
Actually, the side-stepping is your specialty. In this discussion I don't care about basketball, so let's forget the $25 million and get back to the penurious $5 million. That is the total for football since Fowler's gift of $5 in 2011. Are you, or anyone else, not ashamed of that? Do you not see the problem? haha, the only thing I am ashamed of are "fans" like you that do nothing but post negatives and aren't happy unless you're complaining about something. The facts are that a donor put up $5M to improve the football program and those funds were matched by other donors for a total of $10M. All of this happened while a simultaneous effort was going on to raise $15M for the basketball practice facility ... and for the most part, both goals were achieved. $10M was raised and spent on behalf of the football program ... did you donate any money to the effort? Are you even aware of the current fundraising efforts for the athletic dept? I realize that you only care about football (yet are seemingly uniformed as to the goings on inside the program) ... are you clued in to the COA, Training Table and other expenditures that affect football that are the subject of fundraising? You talk a whole lot, yet say very little ... this leads me to believe that you participate even less (if at all) in the meaningful ways that would help football (and athletics) at SDSU. Do you attend the luncheons? Do you get face time with Rocky Long, Jim Sterk or Elliot Hirshman at any of the fundraising events that are held through out the year? I suspect you do none of these things as they would hinder your ability to sit back and criticize from your protected perch of ignorance. If not for those pesky little restraining orders........
|
|
|
Post by retiredaztec on Aug 26, 2015 9:49:31 GMT -8
Disagree. Sterk went the CONTINUITY route when he selected Rocky from HOKE'S staff. That makes sense especially when you consider we returned Lindley and Hillman on offense and McFadden on Defense that year. Agreed. If I recall, Hoke ran out on us with about two weeks to go until LOI Day. Sterk sized up the situation the way any of us would--he had to have a football coach before that day was over. A nationwide search for a name-brand guy was an impossibility. He wanted and needed continuity, and saw a veteran MWC head man right there in his office. Rocky was the logical choice, and once you’ve made any choice you give the guy at least three years, so it’s no scandal that Long is still here. Please bear with Sterk a little longer, naysayers. He really is in a bind; the stadium situation is emphatically not under his control, and public agitation on his part to seize control would only risk political repercussions and perhaps diminish the likelihood of his preferred outcome. I believe Sterk doesn’t want to go for the on-campus option, but I still would bet a month’s pay that he has an on-campus plan in his filing cabinet should the wheels come off in Mission Valley. Any talk about rising to a better conference depends on first getting our stadium situation in order. True, Sterk’s low profile can be read as apathy toward football, but it can also be seen as a smart man knowing when to keep his mouth shut. Your arguments are valid, but my argument is, yes Rocky was a veteran MWC man, but the results of his tenure have been, not surprisingly, unspectacular. The fact is Hoke made no secret from day one that the Michigan job was his dream job and knowing that, the AD had to know, (following the developments in Ann Arbor should have been part of his job description), there was a distinct possibility he would be gone. That said, no one should have been blind sided by his departure. But if there's one thing SDSU and the City of San Diego seem to share in common is they REACT to potential problems, like the Q was going to live forever and State didn't need no stinking on-campus stadium! Long will be going into his FIFTH year as head coach. There's never been a better time for the football program to step up and provide the additional support the AD will need in "working" with the city for a new stadium, especially if the city is suffering from a "post-Charger hangover". Another uninspiring season and the response to SDSU may well be "why?". AGAIN...WIN...BECOME RELEVANT.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2015 10:02:43 GMT -8
Agreed. If I recall, Hoke ran out on us with about two weeks to go until LOI Day. Sterk sized up the situation the way any of us would--he had to have a football coach before that day was over. A nationwide search for a name-brand guy was an impossibility. He wanted and needed continuity, and saw a veteran MWC head man right there in his office. Rocky was the logical choice, and once you’ve made any choice you give the guy at least three years, so it’s no scandal that Long is still here. Please bear with Sterk a little longer, naysayers. He really is in a bind; the stadium situation is emphatically not under his control, and public agitation on his part to seize control would only risk political repercussions and perhaps diminish the likelihood of his preferred outcome. I believe Sterk doesn’t want to go for the on-campus option, but I still would bet a month’s pay that he has an on-campus plan in his filing cabinet should the wheels come off in Mission Valley. Any talk about rising to a better conference depends on first getting our stadium situation in order. True, Sterk’s low profile can be read as apathy toward football, but it can also be seen as a smart man knowing when to keep his mouth shut. Your arguments are valid, but my argument is, yes Rocky was a veteran MWC man, but the results of his tenure have been, not surprisingly, unspectacular. The fact is Hoke made no secret from day one that the Michigan job was his dream job and knowing that, the AD had to know, (following the developments in Ann Arbor should have been part of his job description), there was a distinct possibility he would be gone. That said, no one should have been blind sided by his departure. But if there's one thing SDSU and the City of San Diego seem to share in common is they REACT to potential problems, like the Q was going to live forever and State didn't need no stinking on-campus stadium! Long will be going into his FIFTH year as head coach. There's never been a better time for the football program to step up and provide the additional support the AD will need in "working" with the city for a new stadium, especially if the city is suffering from a "post-Charger hangover". Another uninspiring season and the response to SDSU may well be "why?". AGAIN...WIN...BECOME RELEVANT. It makes sense that you and others here constantly bomb on RL considering he took over national powerhouses and then sank their programs...Oh wait, he's done the exact opposite that, including averaging 8 wins a season at a school that has no winning history in the modern era. The guy won at New Mexico....NEW MEXICO. Just a little perspective to go with all that stomach acid you're chewing.
|
|
|
Post by Spud on Aug 26, 2015 10:58:13 GMT -8
Your arguments are valid, but my argument is, yes Rocky was a veteran MWC man, but the results of his tenure have been, not surprisingly, unspectacular. The fact is Hoke made no secret from day one that the Michigan job was his dream job and knowing that, the AD had to know, (following the developments in Ann Arbor should have been part of his job description), there was a distinct possibility he would be gone. That said, no one should have been blind sided by his departure. But if there's one thing SDSU and the City of San Diego seem to share in common is they REACT to potential problems, like the Q was going to live forever and State didn't need no stinking on-campus stadium! Long will be going into his FIFTH year as head coach. There's never been a better time for the football program to step up and provide the additional support the AD will need in "working" with the city for a new stadium, especially if the city is suffering from a "post-Charger hangover". Another uninspiring season and the response to SDSU may well be "why?". AGAIN...WIN...BECOME RELEVANT. It makes sense that you and others here constantly bomb on RL considering he took over national powerhouses and then sank their programs...Oh wait, he's done the exact opposite that, including averaging 8 wins a season at a school that has no winning history in the modern era. The guy won at New Mexico....NEW MEXICO. Just a little perspective to go with all that stomach acid you're chewing. Going 6 - 16 against +.500 teams is not exactly building a powerhouse. Beating up on cupcakes (and sometimes not even that) isn't that impressive...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2015 11:01:57 GMT -8
It makes sense that you and others here constantly bomb on RL considering he took over national powerhouses and then sank their programs...Oh wait, he's done the exact opposite that, including averaging 8 wins a season at a school that has no winning history in the modern era. The guy won at New Mexico....NEW MEXICO. Just a little perspective to go with all that stomach acid you're chewing. Going 6 - 16 against +.500 teams is not exactly building a powerhouse. Beating up on cupcakes (and sometimes not even that) isn't that impressive... Wow, I flew right over your head didn't I.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Aug 26, 2015 11:57:14 GMT -8
For those of you that keep forgetting ... SDSU Athletics Launches Rise to 25 CampaignDec. 23, 2014"To date, the football program already has accomplished several milestones on and off the field. A generous $5 million challenge gift from Ron and Alexis Fowler in 2011 resulted in $5 million in matching gifts for athletic improvements, including:• Football practice field grass renovation • Turf field replacement • New film towers for football practice field • New lights for football practice field • Renovated football locker room in Fowler Athletics Center • Renovated football locker room at Qualcomm Stadium • Compensation for coaching staff • Added athletic medicine staff • Added rehabilitation equipment to the athletic medicine area • New computers for football staff • Renovated Fowler Athletics Center football suite and meeting rooms • Improved stadium branding • Upgraded video system for coach and student-athlete viewing • Increased department staffing In the coming months, SDSU will unveil additional program information and details." So where does this Rise to 25 campaign stand? How many of these items listed are checked off?If you follow Aztecs football as closely as you claim, you should already know the answer ... if you don't know the answer, then with all your "connections" -- you should be able to find out quickly.
|
|
|
Post by pbnative on Aug 26, 2015 12:26:01 GMT -8
Agreed. If I recall, Hoke ran out on us with about two weeks to go until LOI Day. Sterk sized up the situation the way any of us would--he had to have a football coach before that day was over. A nationwide search for a name-brand guy was an impossibility. He wanted and needed continuity, and saw a veteran MWC head man right there in his office. Rocky was the logical choice, and once you’ve made any choice you give the guy at least three years, so it’s no scandal that Long is still here. Please bear with Sterk a little longer, naysayers. He really is in a bind; the stadium situation is emphatically not under his control, and public agitation on his part to seize control would only risk political repercussions and perhaps diminish the likelihood of his preferred outcome. I believe Sterk doesn’t want to go for the on-campus option, but I still would bet a month’s pay that he has an on-campus plan in his filing cabinet should the wheels come off in Mission Valley. Any talk about rising to a better conference depends on first getting our stadium situation in order. True, Sterk’s low profile can be read as apathy toward football, but it can also be seen as a smart man knowing when to keep his mouth shut. If Sterk & Co truly have a plan for an on-campus (not including the Q site) stadium then they should just build the damn thing. They don't like playing in a half - empty NFL stadium so build a suitable stadium and quit waiting to see what the Chargers are going to do. If the Chargers move out of MValley then take over that land and build housing, classrooms etc.. That is, if they truly have the funding in place as a few seem to think. I think the Chargers should do the same. If they truly want out of SD then they should just go build their damn stadium in Carson rather than waiting for the NFL.
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Aug 26, 2015 12:31:25 GMT -8
Interesting take a look at the top 10 cities ( population) 1 NY. 2 LA .3 Chicago . 4 Houston . 5 Phily . 6 Phoenix . 7 San Antonio . 8 San Diego . 9 Dallas . 10 San Jose . How many of those cities have a Public College football team that does well?
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Aug 26, 2015 12:41:42 GMT -8
Interesting take a look at the top 10 cities ( population) 1 NY. 2 LA .3 Chicago . 4 Houston . 5 Phily . 6 Phoenix . 7 San Antonio . 8 San Diego . 9 Dallas . 10 San Jose . How many of those cities have a Public College football team that does well? I guess it would help if the term "have" was qualified ... in the case of #3 Chicago, does NIU apply? We can probably apply UofH to #4 Houston ... in the case of #6 Phoenix, doess ASU count? You can obviously link UTSA, SDSU, and SJSU to their respective cities, but does North Texas get to call #9 Dallas home? Once we set the qualifications for "have", we then have to set the qualifications for "does well". I am not trying to be a smart arse about this, but I think the perimeters you use in your statement are a bit too broad to answer effectively ...
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Aug 26, 2015 13:16:52 GMT -8
What major top 10 city has a public football team rated in the top 25 college football teams . LA has UCLA , USC (private ). Not sure how close ASU is to Phoenix . Or even go to the top 20 cities Only Austin #11 and Columbus # 15 have college football teams in the top 25 .
Do college football teams from " smaller college football cities " seem to do better ? Where the college city/team is a focal point of the area . Just a thought .
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Aug 26, 2015 14:57:11 GMT -8
What major top 10 city has a public football team rated in the top 25 college football teams . LA has UCLA , USC (private ). Not sure how close ASU is to Phoenix . Or even go to the top 20 cities Only Austin #11 and Columbus # 15 have college football teams in the top 25 . Do college football teams from " smaller college football cities " seem to do better ? Where the college city/team is a focal point of the area . Just a thought . Tempe is to Phoenix what La Mesa is to San Diego. Think I'd throw U-Michigan in the mix as well, given it's only 30 or so minutes outside Detroit. UW in Seattle has historically been successful. Probably missing a couple.
Definitely get your point - there are hurdles to not being the top dog in your city, and with having a ton of additional activities taking away the discretionary dollar. On game day every checker at Safeway is wearing Green in Eugene, Crimson in Pullman, Blue/White in State college, etc. Streets are empty after the game starts, etc. Branding and promotion is city-wide without UO, Oregon St, WSU, etc. doing a damn thing.
The pro's - large population, & several large corporations, many of which are alums. Downside - more comp for the $, even among the alumni base. Think this is exacerbated by the fact we don't have an on-campus stadium and/or the fact our facility is dominated by a pro team (for now). On local news, with only x-minutes for sports SDSU is lucky to get a minute or two, while many smaller college towns it's the ONLY sports report, other than generic scores.
IMO we're like Houston in that big city, small (G5) program, but they have the advantage of a new, university owned stadium. That would definitely help with branding, etc.
Another factor to consider is how many universities are very successful in both sports? Wisky's, UCLA's, UA's, etc. aren't commonplace. Duke's getting there, but hasn't been. Kansas - definition of a 1-sport town. So again, it's battling for the discretionary $$, and definitely a factor.
We just need the damn Chargers thing to get figured out & then act accordingly. It'll definitely change the landscape to some degree, even only a little.
|
|
|
Post by HollywoodAztec on Aug 26, 2015 15:48:43 GMT -8
Agreed. If I recall, Hoke ran out on us with about two weeks to go until LOI Day. Sterk sized up the situation the way any of us would--he had to have a football coach before that day was over. A nationwide search for a name-brand guy was an impossibility. He wanted and needed continuity, and saw a veteran MWC head man right there in his office. Rocky was the logical choice, and once you’ve made any choice you give the guy at least three years, so it’s no scandal that Long is still here. Please bear with Sterk a little longer, naysayers. He really is in a bind; the stadium situation is emphatically not under his control, and public agitation on his part to seize control would only risk political repercussions and perhaps diminish the likelihood of his preferred outcome. I believe Sterk doesn’t want to go for the on-campus option, but I still would bet a month’s pay that he has an on-campus plan in his filing cabinet should the wheels come off in Mission Valley. Any talk about rising to a better conference depends on first getting our stadium situation in order. True, Sterk’s low profile can be read as apathy toward football, but it can also be seen as a smart man knowing when to keep his mouth shut. Your arguments are valid, but my argument is, yes Rocky was a veteran MWC man, but the results of his tenure have been, not surprisingly, unspectacular. The fact is Hoke made no secret from day one that the Michigan job was his dream job and knowing that, the AD had to know, (following the developments in Ann Arbor should have been part of his job description), there was a distinct possibility he would be gone. That said, no one should have been blind sided by his departure. But if there's one thing SDSU and the City of San Diego seem to share in common is they REACT to potential problems, like the Q was going to live forever and State didn't need no stinking on-campus stadium! Long will be going into his FIFTH year as head coach. There's never been a better time for the football program to step up and provide the additional support the AD will need in "working" with the city for a new stadium, especially if the city is suffering from a "post-Charger hangover". Another uninspiring season and the response to SDSU may well be "why?". AGAIN...WIN...BECOME RELEVANT. It is nearly impossible to know every move a school is making. All an AD can do is make presumptions because Hoke did not and will not disclose every detail until negotiations with Michigan were finalized and contracts offered for fear that he may lose his current position and be out of a job. Hoke was simply looking out for his self-interest. As well, if I recall correctly, Hoke was the 3rd or 4th choice, so there was a higher probability of him remaining an Aztec coach. Evidently, that’s not how it played out but my point being is anyone, despite having gathered all the necessary information, can still be blind-sided.
|
|
|
Post by HollywoodAztec on Aug 26, 2015 15:50:31 GMT -8
And some think Sacramento is ahead of Miami, with their failed Fusion, except for Beckham. Still the question would be when does MLS decide to pause the express for a few years. 24, 26, ? It appears the goal is 24 teams by 2020. I've actually never heard of Sacramento being mentioned as one of the possible expansion teams either so this is news to me.
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Aug 26, 2015 16:38:14 GMT -8
so is there any kind of importance/ factor that only 2 top populated cities have top 25 football teams(20 %) LA and Phoenix .? High majority of the very successful football teams are located in medium to smaller cities or college towns . Back to the old phrase Can there be too much to do in a major city ?. Or even in a large city ,unless you win and play in a major conference , fans are not going to fill your stadium. Plus the Alums for SDSU are not very involved .
|
|
|
Post by ab on Aug 26, 2015 17:32:12 GMT -8
If Sterk & Co truly have a plan for an on-campus (not including the Q site) stadium then they should just build the damn thing. They don't like playing in a half - empty NFL stadium so build a suitable stadium and quit waiting to see what the Chargers are going to do. If the Chargers move out of MValley then take over that land and build housing, classrooms etc.. That is, if they truly have the funding in place as a few seem to think. ...Right, because building a new stadium on campus versus building it on a newly acquired MV site is such a minor detail they should just go for it, amirite? Never said it was a minor detail but since they seem so unhappy playing in the NFL 60k seat stadium and only draw 30k i.e. 50% empty or full (your choice) it won't change with a new NFL stadium so why not build what they want on-campus since so many seem to think Sterk has a plan for a stadium on-campus and the funding to back it up. I suspect they should get started asap cuz you know there's going to be lawsuits up the butt if they try to build in on the current campus location.
|
|
|
Post by ab on Aug 26, 2015 17:40:40 GMT -8
So where does this Rise to 25 campaign stand? How many of these items listed are checked off?If you follow Aztecs football as closely as you claim, you should already know the answer ... if you don't know the answer, then with all your "connections" -- you should be able to find out quickly. You continue to prove that you can't post or answer any question without your "head up your ass" attitude. I've never claimed that especially in recent years. Unlike you I have far more enjoyable and important things to do with my time. Oh, and I see you can't answer the question anyway. Back under your rock Tightee Whitees
|
|
|
Post by ab on Aug 26, 2015 17:46:15 GMT -8
Our own stadium OR a deal where we split control of signage, parking, etc. with the NFL team. Since the latter won't happen, I'd say the former.
There's no doubt SDSU wants the Chargers to Bolt, from a selfish perspective.
We seem to ignore the cost of building a new stadium and the current sweetheart deal on sharing the stadium. If we get a similar deal with a new NFL stadium, it would probably be cheaper. A new NFL stadium would be incredible for the Aztecs. Bill.... better be careful with all these anti-Chargers and anti- new nfl caliber stadium folks on here since most of them couldn't see the forest through the trees.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Aug 26, 2015 17:46:59 GMT -8
If you follow Aztecs football as closely as you claim, you should already know the answer ... if you don't know the answer, then with all your "connections" -- you should be able to find out quickly. You continue to prove that you can't post or answer any question without your "head up your ass" attitude. I've never claimed that especially in recent years. Unlike you I have far more enjoyable and important things to do with my time. Oh, and I see you can't answer the question anyway. Back under your rock Tightee Whitees Ah Bruce, sigh -- I figured I'd have to do the work for you. Let's start with reading comprehension ... " To date, the football program already has accomplished several milestones on and off the field. A generous $5 million challenge gift from Ron and Alexis Fowler in 2011 resulted in $5 million in matching gifts for athletic improvements, including ..." This was not a "to-do-list" --- and if you had been paying attention to the program for the last 3 years you'd know that they have already been done.
|
|
|
Post by ab on Aug 26, 2015 17:52:15 GMT -8
You continue to prove that you can't post or answer any question without your "head up your ass" attitude. I've never claimed that especially in recent years. Unlike you I have far more enjoyable and important things to do with my time. Oh, and I see you can't answer the question anyway. Back under your rock Tightee Whitees Ah Bruce, sigh -- I figured I'd have to do the work for you. Let's start with reading comprehension ... " To date, the football program already has accomplished several milestones on and off the field. A generous $5 million challenge gift from Ron and Alexis Fowler in 2011 resulted in $5 million in matching gifts for athletic improvements, including ..." This was not a "to-do-list" --- and if you had been paying attention to the program for the last 3 years you'd know that they have already been done. Sterk had his list to accomplish in his drive for 25 or whatever he called it in the last year. My question was simple, but apparently too complicated for you. I'll ask it again, how many of his line items have been accomplished and which ones are they? Don't bother answering Tightee Whiteees
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Aug 26, 2015 18:34:38 GMT -8
Ah Bruce, sigh -- I figured I'd have to do the work for you. Let's start with reading comprehension ... " To date, the football program already has accomplished several milestones on and off the field. A generous $5 million challenge gift from Ron and Alexis Fowler in 2011 resulted in $5 million in matching gifts for athletic improvements, including ..." This was not a "to-do-list" --- and if you had been paying attention to the program for the last 3 years you'd know that they have already been done. Sterk had his list to accomplish in his drive for 25 or whatever he called it in the last year. My question was simple, but apparently too complicated for you. I'll ask it again, how many of his line items have been accomplished and which ones are they? Don't bother answering Tightee Whiteees "During the next 25 months, the university and athletic department will focus resources and attention on ensuring financial stability for the program, addressing stadium improvements, and ensuring a solid season-ticket base."To carry the plan forward, SDSU will actively engage the entire San Diego community to achieve a clearly established series of goals, including: • Investing in major enhancements to improve the Qualcomm Stadium experience for fans and players • Improving the game day experience for fans • Improving the student-athlete experience • Increasing attendance at home football games So basically you want to know if these goals (that were announced on Dec 23, 2014) have been accomplished by Aug 26, 2015 for the a season that doesn't kick off until Sept 05, 2015? Or did you want to go back to the $10M in facility and salary investments referenced in the previous list?
|
|