|
Post by Fishn'Aztec on Aug 27, 2015 9:24:17 GMT -8
Yeah, it's probably that sweetheart deal they cut with Hair Thompson! Hooray for us & screw the rest of the MGC! SDSU should command the same respect from Thompson when it comes to BB revenues & cushy deals! JMO
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2015 9:25:43 GMT -8
Playing against, and beating a series of high profile opponents on a national stage is the primary difference. We get a couple of those and watch us roll. Hope springs eternal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2015 9:30:31 GMT -8
Playing against, and beating a series of high profile opponents on a national stage is the primary difference. We get a couple of those and watch us roll. Hope springs eternal. very true...we are simply starting the process far too late. Boise was in our place in the late 90's...since then they have been riding high.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Aug 27, 2015 9:33:56 GMT -8
Yeah, it's probably that sweetheart deal they cut with Hair Thompson! Hooray for us & screw the rest of the MGC! SDSU should command the same respect from Thompson when it comes to BB revenues & cushy deals! JMO Unfortunately, the operative, and revelatory word is "should". Thompson is not in our "camp". Our best hope, is that he is replaced, or leaves.
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Aug 27, 2015 9:36:47 GMT -8
It's not the coaching, it's the PROGRAM overall. And it's been a LOT longer than 10 years. They've been strong for 16 years, so you have a history and a tradition of winning.
Koetter won at BSU & then went on to be a mediocre coach at ASU; Hawkins dominated at BSU then flopped at Colorado. It's not coaching; it's what they put around the coaches.
It's also the fact they can get kids in who wouldn't qualify elsewhere, or at least that's been the case. They got a LOT of borderline eligible recruits - believe it used to be called Prop 5's or something like that? So any kid who couldn't get into the UW would default to BSU, etc.
Starts with a good program, strong infrastructure, fan support, local business support & facilities, and then you fold in good coaching (but not necessarily great) & have some success. Then you maintain continuity, most often hiring from within & maintaining several of the same coaches. Hawkins was hired within; Peterson as well; and now Harsin. They didn't have to gamble with any "up & comer" nor even take a risk, really.
The fact they get significantly more in TV revenue gives them the edge as well, and will continue to do so until the contract is over.
We've been decent now for 5 years, so we're only about 10 years behind when it comes to tradition. Hopefully we follow the same path, if not pass them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2015 9:43:25 GMT -8
It's not the coaching, it's the PROGRAM overall. And it's been a LOT longer than 10 years. They've been strong for 16 years, so you have a history and a tradition of winning.
Koetter won at BSU & then went on to be a mediocre coach at ASU; Hawkins dominated at BSU then flopped at Colorado. It's not coaching; it's what they put around the coaches.
It's also the fact they can get kids in who wouldn't qualify elsewhere, or at least that's been the case. They got a LOT of borderline eligible recruits - believe it used to be called Prop 5's or something like that? So any kid who couldn't get into the UW would default to BSU, etc.
Starts with a good program, strong infrastructure, fan support, local business support & facilities, and then you fold in good coaching (but not necessarily great) & have some success. Then you maintain continuity, most often hiring from within & maintaining several of the same coaches. Hawkins was hired within; Peterson as well; and now Harsin. They didn't have to gamble with any "up & comer" nor even take a risk, really.
The fact they get significantly more in TV revenue gives them the edge as well, and will continue to do so until the contract is over.
We've been decent now for 5 years, so we're only about 10 years behind when it comes to tradition. Hopefully we follow the same path, if not pass them. The coaching tree at Boise is nothing short of spectacular when you really look at it. Goes back to the 80's...
|
|
|
Post by Area51 Aztec on Aug 27, 2015 10:10:24 GMT -8
Hate to say it, but fanbase too. Sad buy very true
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Aug 27, 2015 10:21:08 GMT -8
It's not the coaching, it's the PROGRAM overall. And it's been a LOT longer than 10 years. They've been strong for 16 years, so you have a history and a tradition of winning.
Koetter won at BSU & then went on to be a mediocre coach at ASU; Hawkins dominated at BSU then flopped at Colorado. It's not coaching; it's what they put around the coaches.
It's also the fact they can get kids in who wouldn't qualify elsewhere, or at least that's been the case. They got a LOT of borderline eligible recruits - believe it used to be called Prop 5's or something like that? So any kid who couldn't get into the UW would default to BSU, etc.
Starts with a good program, strong infrastructure, fan support, local business support & facilities, and then you fold in good coaching (but not necessarily great) & have some success. Then you maintain continuity, most often hiring from within & maintaining several of the same coaches. Hawkins was hired within; Peterson as well; and now Harsin. They didn't have to gamble with any "up & comer" nor even take a risk, really.
The fact they get significantly more in TV revenue gives them the edge as well, and will continue to do so until the contract is over.
We've been decent now for 5 years, so we're only about 10 years behind when it comes to tradition. Hopefully we follow the same path, if not pass them. The coaching tree at Boise is nothing short of spectacular when you really look at it. Goes back to the 80's... Not really. Quite the opposite actually. Skip Hall only won 60% of his games, and that was while they were D1-AA; Pokey Allen won only 62%, while also a D1-AA school. Neither ever coached a game at the D1-A level. Tom Mason, who's a great guy who I knew from HS, only went 1-9. Nutt was 5-6 at Boise before bolting; his Arkansas teams were good, but flopped at Ole Miss.
The winning started with Koetter in 98/99. He went 26-10 at BSU before bolting to ASU, and then went 21-28 in conference play.
Hawkins really started the big run, going 37-3 in the WAC. However, he FLOPPED at Colorado. Barnett was 34-22 in the B12 before Hawkins arrived; Hawkins took over & was 10-27. Hawkins was a good low level coach, but far from a great coach & definitely not "spectacular".
Then they hired within, keeping some of the same staff & the same traditions. Peterson was great but his winning % is basically the same as Hawkins. I like him & think he'll do well, but he's basically a .500 coach at UW and will probably stay around the same or drop this year.
Harsin just started, but maintaining a lot of what was already in place. It's more the program than the coaching.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2015 10:50:06 GMT -8
Wasnt Pagano a coach at Boise in the mid 80's? I thought they had a more impressive lineage than that for some reason.
|
|
|
Post by rebar619 on Aug 27, 2015 10:51:15 GMT -8
There is always $$$ available...but it will take a few more seasons of success and if we get some bigger bowl games, there will be more donors to the football program. Absolutely, the money is out there. The key is that the football program needs to give people the hope that their money will be invested in a winning program. Look no farther than the basketball program. It has been said over and over around here that this is the season - no excuses. Win the conference outright and make an Access Bowl game and the money will start coming into the program. Give people something to believe in. That is what worked for Boise and will work in spades at SDSU.
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Aug 27, 2015 11:01:46 GMT -8
Wasnt Pagano a coach at Boise in the mid 80's? I thought they had a more impressive lineage than that for some reason. He was a LB coach for a couple years - his first paid coaching gig. Moved on to be an assistant at 4 other colleges before moving into the pro ranks.
You could find many great former assistants at a LOT of schools, but he was at BSU before he was even established.
BSU is about the program; they've established themselves much like Gonzaga. If you want to be a big fish in a little pond, BSU was the place to be in the 90's & 2000's, and they'd steal recruits from the lesser P5's like OSU & WSU. Happening less & less now with the financial divide, and that's despite the fact they have the sweetheart conference deal & are operating with more $$ than other schools in our conference.
Coaching hasn't been the key to their success. It hasn't hurt them. We'll see if Peterson pans out & proves to be the first BSU HC to really be successful long-term at a bigger school.
|
|
|
Post by missiontrails on Aug 27, 2015 11:17:01 GMT -8
It's not the coaching, it's the PROGRAM overall. And it's been a LOT longer than 10 years. They've been strong for 16 years, so you have a history and a tradition of winning.
Koetter won at BSU & then went on to be a mediocre coach at ASU; Hawkins dominated at BSU then flopped at Colorado. It's not coaching; it's what they put around the coaches.
It's also the fact they can get kids in who wouldn't qualify elsewhere, or at least that's been the case. They got a LOT of borderline eligible recruits - believe it used to be called Prop 5's or something like that? So any kid who couldn't get into the UW would default to BSU, etc.
Starts with a good program, strong infrastructure, fan support, local business support & facilities, and then you fold in good coaching (but not necessarily great) & have some success. Then you maintain continuity, most often hiring from within & maintaining several of the same coaches. Hawkins was hired within; Peterson as well; and now Harsin. They didn't have to gamble with any "up & comer" nor even take a risk, really.
The fact they get significantly more in TV revenue gives them the edge as well, and will continue to do so until the contract is over.
We've been decent now for 5 years, so we're only about 10 years behind when it comes to tradition. Hopefully we follow the same path, if not pass them. Hmmmmm, there is a certain poster on this board that would reflexively frame those as "lazy hires". That's using his "own words".
|
|
|
Post by Old School on Aug 27, 2015 11:30:56 GMT -8
I recall Kansas State was a pitiful program, today they're a powerhouse. I'm hoping for a similar turnaround on the Mesa.
Oldie Out
|
|
|
Post by aztecgold on Aug 27, 2015 12:35:39 GMT -8
They sellout every home game and have some very zealous fans, much like SDSU in basketball. They have had pretty good coaching over the years, but they were able to keep Peterson for many years while they developed an even stronger tradition of winning over a long period of time. SDSU gets a decent coach like Hoke and he leaves after a year and half, no continuity like SDSU has in basketball with Fisher. SDSU was lucky they were able to keep Fisher to build the team into what it is today. I guess you have to blame management since SDSU had Coryell, but could not keep or hire good coaches after he left. Rocky is doing a good job, just not sure he can put SDSU over the top. We'll see. They need a better offense. I prefer the uptempo spread style and that would attract a lot more fans and they really need more fans.
Boise State probably has even less a chance to join a P5 conference than SDSU. They are better in football, but have no media market, no recruiting base, and have very low academic standards since they were just a JC school 20-30 years.
|
|
|
Post by TheSanDiegan on Aug 27, 2015 12:40:09 GMT -8
Out of curiosity, who was #2 on the list?
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Aug 27, 2015 12:49:27 GMT -8
Out of curiosity, who was #2 on the list? Marshall.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Aug 27, 2015 12:56:19 GMT -8
BYU was on that list between Boise St and Marshall, but their status as a non-P5 independent (and part-time P5 for the scheduling convenience of some resource conferences) making it a gray area that has the Aztecs at either #3 or #4 depending on if you count BYwho as a G5 or not ...
|
|
|
Post by pbnative on Aug 27, 2015 12:56:51 GMT -8
They sellout every home game and have some very zealous fans, much like SDSU in basketball. . They have had pretty good coaching over the years, but they were able to keep Peterson for many years while they developed an even stronger tradition of winning over a long period of time. SDSU gets a decent coach like Hoke and he leaves after a year and half, no continuity like SDSU has in basketball with Fisher. SDSU was lucky they were able to keep Fisher to build the team into what it is today. I guess you have to blame management since SDSU had Coryell, but could not keep or hire good coaches after he left. Rocky is doing a good job, just not sure he can put SDSU over the top. We'll see. They need a better offense. I prefer the uptempo spread style and that would attract a lot more fans and they really need more fans. Boise State probably has even less a chance to join a P5 conference than SDSU. They are better in football, but have no media market, no recruiting base, and have very low academic standards since they were just a JC school 20-30 years. That is false. In fact Boise St and SDSU have very similar attendance numbers. The major difference is the Albertsons Stadium only holds 36,000. The other major difference is Boise's school president put huge investments and support in their football program, while SDSU's president almost got the entire athletic department axed.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Aug 27, 2015 13:01:35 GMT -8
They sellout every home game and have some very zealous fans, much like SDSU in basketball. . They have had pretty good coaching over the years, but they were able to keep Peterson for many years while they developed an even stronger tradition of winning over a long period of time. SDSU gets a decent coach like Hoke and he leaves after a year and half, no continuity like SDSU has in basketball with Fisher. SDSU was lucky they were able to keep Fisher to build the team into what it is today. I guess you have to blame management since SDSU had Coryell, but could not keep or hire good coaches after he left. Rocky is doing a good job, just not sure he can put SDSU over the top. We'll see. They need a better offense. I prefer the uptempo spread style and that would attract a lot more fans and they really need more fans. Boise State probably has even less a chance to join a P5 conference than SDSU. They are better in football, but have no media market, no recruiting base, and have very low academic standards since they were just a JC school 20-30 years. That is false. In fact Boise St and SDSU have very similar attendance numbers. The major difference is the Albertsons Stadium only holds 36,000. The other major difference is Boise's school president put huge investments and support in their football program, while SDSU's president almost got the entire athletic department axed. I will add that BSU started their winning tradition by playing extremely easy schedules and creating a winning mentality before incrementally increasing the difficulty of their schedules ... a path that spanned more than a decade that Aztec fans wouldn't be as accepting of ...
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Aug 27, 2015 13:11:15 GMT -8
BYU was on that list between Boise St and Marshall, but their status as a non-P5 independent (and part-time P5 for the scheduling convenience of some resource conferences) making it a gray area that has the Aztecs at either #3 or #4 depending on if you count BYwho as a G5 or not ... On his Power Poll yes, but not on the ESPN link which factors in success vs. schedule. BYU falls in "honorable mentions," primarily due to the fact they should struggle against their schedule. Definitely a gray area on BYU, but I'd think anyone outside the P5 should count.
|
|