|
Post by standiego on Apr 26, 2016 18:47:36 GMT -8
Expansion is primarily done for 1 main reason to gain additional TV markets for that conference-Money . As pointed out that is why BIG , PAC and others added the teams they did . Any other issue is totally bogus . The only conference that may have academic thoughts is the IVY .
Rivalries are not always determined by closeness to a campus . Yes for many , but was BYU vs SDSU because of location or something that developed ? Would Navy be a better rivalry for SDSU then AFA? In football who would SDSU fans rather beat Fresno or BSU ?
Last week Coug said Fisher was wrong to want more OOC games and less MW conference games . You also said Fisher was wrong when he said he wanted the MW T played in Vegas but NOT on Vegas 's home court . Now you state that Fisher will Not coach in a new conference - so if the Aztecs were to accept an invite to play in the B12 -(we can hope and pray ) or the AAC he would not be the Aztecs coach . Would agree if he has retired but have not heard about his retirement .
The AAC is a viable option that SDSU should take a close look at for various reasons if the B12 does not include us . Leadership of the Conference, Future of the Conference in major sports , RECRUITING that leads to better teams ,Possible improved TV deal that does not get slanted to BSU , rarely listening to the dean of the MBB coaches in MW ,.....
|
|
|
Post by sdsuballer on Apr 26, 2016 19:44:44 GMT -8
This conference is a joke until we get a real commisioner and a mobile device app were we can at least stream live games for every team... It would also help if we had better AD's through out the conference...
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Apr 26, 2016 19:59:17 GMT -8
Expansion is primarily done for 1 main reason to gain additional TV markets for that conference-Money . As pointed out that is why BIG , PAC and others added the teams they did . Any other issue is totally bogus . The only conference that may have academic thoughts is the IVY . Rivalries are not always determined by closeness to a campus . Yes for many , but was BYU vs SDSU because of location or something that developed ? Would Navy be a better rivalry for SDSU then AFA? In football who would SDSU fans rather beat Fresno or BSU ? Last week Coug said Fisher was wrong to want more OOC games and less MW conference games . You also said Fisher was wrong when he said he wanted the MW T played in Vegas but NOT on Vegas 's home court . Now you state that Fisher will Not coach in a new conference - so if the Aztecs were to accept an invite to play in the B12 -(we can hope and pray ) or the AAC he would not be the Aztecs coach . Would agree if he has retired but have not heard about his retirement . The AAC is a viable option that SDSU should take a close look at for various reasons if the B12 does not include us . Leadership of the Conference, Future of the Conference in major sports , RECRUITING that leads to better teams ,Possible improved TV deal that does not get slanted to BSU , rarely listening to the dean of the MBB coaches in MW ,..... First off, there are academic requirements within some of the conferences. The P12 will NOT take a university which is not a Tier 1 Research institution - they've eliminated several schools in the past for that very reason. Would then bend? Maybe, but it'd take a lot to get it past the presidents who ultimately decide.
Second, if you go strictly by its definition, virtually every team we play is our "rival" since we're competing for the same thing - the conference championship. So sure, WVU COULD be our "rival" or UCF. However, it's not reality. SDSU to BYU = 700 miles, far from 1400. Boise is a nemesis, but far from a "Rival" IMO. We have big games, but that's about it. Our conference "Rivals" center more around UNLV & NM in hoops than anyone else, and in football I'd say we don't really have one (maybe Fresno). You typically play Rivals annually and have fan bases willing to make the trip, which means they're in your Division within your conference, and usually in your half of the country. Boise's not in our division in football last I checked - we'll go 2 years without even playing them potentially. Do we compete with them - hell yes, but "rival"? No. AF is definitely not a "rival" by any stretch of the imagination. If we did actually merge with the AAC it would most likely be in a 'best of the rest' format, meaning multiple MW teams in one division & AAC's in the other. Our "rivals" would most likely remain those in the NEW West. If we go to the B12 our "rival" would most likely be the team closest to us, or at least one of those in our half of the country, such as a BYU (if also added).
I didn't say Fisher was wrong; I said I disagreed with his opinion, and just because it's his opinion it doesn't make it right. There's a difference. The majority of the conference disagrees with him, does that mean the majority is wrong? And yes, if we move to another conference it would likely be after our TV deal runs out (2020), and most likely not for at least 2-3 more years. Even an invite from the B12 in June, which I don't see, would take 2 years to implement. So no, I do not believe Fisher will be around for more than 2-3 more years. I hope he is, but don't believe so.
We have no idea how the conference bubble will fall out in 2-3 more years. NONE. The AAC w/o Houston & Cincy would be pretty lame, actually. We have no idea how their TV contract would compare to ours at that time, since they're pretty equal now. In football, the AAC was better last year but the MW was better the year prior. In hoops, they sent more to the dance this year but we sent more last year. For all we know, the B12 could completely implode, which means the scramble would be between the B12, AAC & MWC. We simply do not know.
What we do know is nothing is happening until the P5 conferences sort themselves out. Until then, I wouldn't get all bent out of shape about it, but then again I'm sure every other post of yours will continue to whine about the MWC, right?
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Apr 26, 2016 20:14:02 GMT -8
Those who say we have no chance of ever being invited to the P12 are living in the past -- when SDSU was a nice little 4-yr. college on the Mesa. It's not that anymore. Its academic standing has gone from almost non-existent to higher than four of the P12 schools (and soon to be five or six.) The entire deal hinges on the MV West expansion. Should that turn into reality, the P12 will be forced to let us in. Part of the plan for the expansion is the establishment of a research component for the university and the possibility of granting Ph.D.s and conducting research, perhaps stand-alone, or perhaps in conjunction with UCSD on the site. The MV West expansion will push SDSU's enrollment to 45k to 50k+, making SDSU among the 10 largest universities in the U.S. -- all of whom are P5 schools. With our new stadium, excellent location for hosting bowl games, etc., it will be extremely difficult for a P5 conference to ignore us. And if the B12 starts sniffing around, the P12 will definitely snap us up. The last thing in the world they want is the B12 dipping into their Calif. recruiting pool. And, no, we don't have to wait 7 to 10 years to bust down the doors. If we have a plan in place and MV West is approved and in the works -- 2 to 4 years from now -- a conference might want to include us as a pre-emptive strike. So, yeah, MV West is massively critical to SDSU's sports program and it future. Without it, we're doomed to the bottom-feeding has beens of the MGC. Don't both the B12 and Pac12 already dip into the San Diego region for recruiting? I say this because those conferences can do this, and can continue to do this, without including SDSU in their conferences.
|
|
|
Post by chris92065 on Apr 26, 2016 20:53:23 GMT -8
We are getting hammered financially due to the tv contract. As are most other G5/non-Major conferences. The AAC's contract isn't any better than ours right now. AAC is 7-year $126MM, while MWC is 7-year $116MM. So the gap is about $100k per team per year. The biggest issue is the BSU sweetheart deal, meaning the funds aren't distributed very well, especially knowing SDSU is among the least likely to get picked up for the bonus money.
There isn't going to be realignment until the P5's realign. We can talk about it all we want, but nothing is happening for 2-3+ years, and not without the P5's having the initial say. Jumping to the AAC accomplishes nothing right now, just like having Houston/Cincy jumping to the MWC would accomplish nothing. Plus, any program we'd want to align with from the AAC (& MWC) isn't going to commit to any new, long-term conference TV deal when they know there's a possibility they could get a P5 invite. Why would you? In order for the "new" conference to survive, and warrant any type of decent (improved) TV deal the buyout would need to be enormous.
We can either bitch about it, as many are obsessed with doing, or deal with it until the situation changes. Our only option today is to win our conference. I'd rather focus on what we actually can do, than complain about what we can't control. But that's just me.
There is a lot can be done. Just a matter of will power
|
|
|
Post by retiredaztec on Apr 26, 2016 20:59:10 GMT -8
Why does this thread remind me of that song by Jimi … Still Raining, Still DreamingRainy day, rain all day Ain't no use in gettin' uptight Just let it groove its own way Let it drain your worries away yeah Lay back and groove on a rainy day hey Lay back and dream on a rainy day Lay back and groove on a rainy day Lay back Oh yeah ! Lay back and groove on a rainy day Lay back and groove on a rainy day Lay back and dream on a rainy day Lay back and groove on a rainy day Lay back and dream on a rainy day Lay back and, lay back, lay back, lay back and groove. Ooh Aaaah ! Lay back and groove on a rainy day Lay back and groove on a rainy day Lay back and groove on a rainy day Lay back and groove on a rainy day Lay back and dream on a rainy day. Still rainin' still dreamin' OR …maybe it was… Rainy Day, Dream AwayAnyone had Windowpane? LOL I needed a serious break from all this gaiety, but this is hilarious and priceless..but you missed the most important part.... " hey man, take a look out the window and see what's happening"....my business plan for years.....advice that should be well heeded.. sometimes you can find wisdom on this board..
|
|
|
Post by RiffelBooks on Apr 26, 2016 21:13:51 GMT -8
As the guy partly responsible for pushing the "move to the AAC" concept here late last year, let me respond to a few things that have been mentioned here.
1. The AAC's TV contract is just as bad as the MW's - true, but one of the possibilities opening up is the big move by Fox to acquire half of the B1G's tier 1 rights. Speculation is that ESPN, after losing out on that deal, might turn to the AAC. While the AAC certainly can't replace the B1G, it's better than nothing and just moving their games off ESPN News could result in a much better contract. I'm not sold on this theory, myself, since ESPN is in a world of financial hurt, so we'll wait and see how this plays out.
2. Just win, which got Utah and TCU into the P5 - explain Colorado. OK, the Denver TV market. It's still about TV markets.
3. Mission Valley will take seven years - if the Chargers initiative qualifies and passes, it will probably take that long to get downtown built and then the Aztecs stadium constructed. On the other hand, I can see SDSU playing in the downtown facility for several years. OTOH, two-thirds is a huge threshold. The land could very well be available in a few years with the Bolts playing second fiddle in Inglewood. I'd still prefer a stadium squeezed onto the main campus and Mission Valley utilized fully for academic expansion. It's a bigger win for both projects.
4. A Mission Valley stadium will force the Pac-12's hand - No, strong TV ratings for the Aztecs in San Diego in a few years might merit some Pac-12 consideration. Maybe. The Pac-12 TV situation is looking dire and while SDSU might not help much, San Diego itself might if we have any reason to watch.
|
|
|
Post by longtimebooster on Apr 26, 2016 21:39:28 GMT -8
As the guy partly responsible for pushing the "move to the AAC" concept here late last year, let me respond to a few things that have been mentioned here. 1. The AAC's TV contract is just as bad as the MW's - true, but one of the possibilities opening up is the big move by Fox to acquire half of the B1G's tier 1 rights. Speculation is that ESPN, after losing out on that deal, might turn to the AAC. While the AAC certainly can't replace the B1G, it's better than nothing and just moving their games off ESPN News could result in a much better contract. I'm not sold on this theory, myself, since ESPN is in a world of financial hurt, so we'll wait and see how this plays out. 2. Just win, which got Utah and TCU into the P5 - explain Colorado. OK, the Denver TV market. It's still about TV markets. 3. Mission Valley will take seven years - if the Chargers initiative qualifies and passes, it will probably take that long to get downtown built and then the Aztecs stadium constructed. On the other hand, I can see SDSU playing in the downtown facility for several years. OTOH, two-thirds is a huge threshold. The land could very well be available in a few years with the Bolts playing second fiddle in Inglewood. I'd still prefer a stadium squeezed onto the main campus and Mission Valley utilized fully for academic expansion. It's a bigger win for both projects. 4. A Mission Valley stadium will force the Pac-12's hand - No, strong TV ratings for the Aztecs in San Diego in a few years might merit some Pac-12 consideration. Maybe. The Pac-12 TV situation is looking dire and while SDSU might not help much, San Diego itself might if we have any reason to watch. San Diego already has the TV market. We're as large or larger than most of the current P12 markets, save for L.A. and the Bay Area, and certainly the largest untapped, non-P5 market west of the Mississippi. Who cares if this takes 7 years. Doesn't really matter. One of these conferences would be perfectly willing to bet on the come once they know we're going to have a state-of-the-art stadium, a significantly upgraded academic reputation and resources, and a significantly larger student body. Just as long as they know it's on the way and progressing, that'll be good enough for them.
|
|
|
Post by longtimebooster on Apr 26, 2016 21:42:12 GMT -8
Those who say we have no chance of ever being invited to the P12 are living in the past -- when SDSU was a nice little 4-yr. college on the Mesa. It's not that anymore. Its academic standing has gone from almost non-existent to higher than four of the P12 schools (and soon to be five or six.) The entire deal hinges on the MV West expansion. Should that turn into reality, the P12 will be forced to let us in. Part of the plan for the expansion is the establishment of a research component for the university and the possibility of granting Ph.D.s and conducting research, perhaps stand-alone, or perhaps in conjunction with UCSD on the site. The MV West expansion will push SDSU's enrollment to 45k to 50k+, making SDSU among the 10 largest universities in the U.S. -- all of whom are P5 schools. With our new stadium, excellent location for hosting bowl games, etc., it will be extremely difficult for a P5 conference to ignore us. And if the B12 starts sniffing around, the P12 will definitely snap us up. The last thing in the world they want is the B12 dipping into their Calif. recruiting pool. And, no, we don't have to wait 7 to 10 years to bust down the doors. If we have a plan in place and MV West is approved and in the works -- 2 to 4 years from now -- a conference might want to include us as a pre-emptive strike. So, yeah, MV West is massively critical to SDSU's sports program and it future. Without it, we're doomed to the bottom-feeding has beens of the MGC. Don't both the B12 and Pac12 already dip into the San Diego region for recruiting? I say this because those conferences can do this, and can continue to do this, without including SDSU in their conferences. Yes, they both recruit here -- the P12 heavily and the B12 somewhat. However, if we joined the B12, that would significantly increase their schools' attractiveness to SD h.s. athletes with SDSU as an anchor school in the conference. Same with the P12, only visa versa.
|
|
|
Post by northcountymike on Apr 26, 2016 23:18:45 GMT -8
As the guy partly responsible for pushing the "move to the AAC" concept here late last year, let me respond to a few things that have been mentioned here. 1. The AAC's TV contract is just as bad as the MW's - true, but one of the possibilities opening up is the big move by Fox to acquire half of the B1G's tier 1 rights. Speculation is that ESPN, after losing out on that deal, might turn to the AAC. While the AAC certainly can't replace the B1G, it's better than nothing and just moving their games off ESPN News could result in a much better contract. I'm not sold on this theory, myself, since ESPN is in a world of financial hurt, so we'll wait and see how this plays out. 2. Just win, which got Utah and TCU into the P5 - explain Colorado. OK, the Denver TV market. It's still about TV markets. 3. Mission Valley will take seven years - if the Chargers initiative qualifies and passes, it will probably take that long to get downtown built and then the Aztecs stadium constructed. On the other hand, I can see SDSU playing in the downtown facility for several years. OTOH, two-thirds is a huge threshold. The land could very well be available in a few years with the Bolts playing second fiddle in Inglewood. I'd still prefer a stadium squeezed onto the main campus and Mission Valley utilized fully for academic expansion. It's a bigger win for both projects. 4. A Mission Valley stadium will force the Pac-12's hand - No, strong TV ratings for the Aztecs in San Diego in a few years might merit some Pac-12 consideration. Maybe. The Pac-12 TV situation is looking dire and while SDSU might not help much, San Diego itself might if we have any reason to watch. San Diego already has the TV market. We're as large or larger than most of the current P12 markets, save for L.A. and the Bay Area, and certainly the largest untapped, non-P5 market west of the Mississippi. Who cares if this takes 7 years. Doesn't really matter. One of these conferences would be perfectly willing to bet on the come once they know we're going to have a state-of-the-art stadium, a significantly upgraded academic reputation and resources, and a significantly larger student body. Just as long as they know it's on the way and progressing, that'll be good enough for them. An interesting thought...not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet, but yes, although we may be a decent-sized market, I just don't think we're a "sports" market, unfortunately. Who knows if that has had any influence on or past, current, or future aspirations to switch conferences?
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Apr 26, 2016 23:34:03 GMT -8
San Diego already has the TV market. We're as large or larger than most of the current P12 markets, save for L.A. and the Bay Area, and certainly the largest untapped, non-P5 market west of the Mississippi. Who cares if this takes 7 years. Doesn't really matter. One of these conferences would be perfectly willing to bet on the come once they know we're going to have a state-of-the-art stadium, a significantly upgraded academic reputation and resources, and a significantly larger student body. Just as long as they know it's on the way and progressing, that'll be good enough for them. An interesting thought...not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet, but yes, although we may be a decent-sized market, I just don't think we're a "sports" market, unfortunately. Who knows if that has had any influence on or past, current, or future aspirations to switch conferences? Cal & Stanford aren't "sports" markets either. Neither is UCLA unless they are winning. USC is relatively consistent.
|
|
|
Post by northcountymike on Apr 26, 2016 23:36:08 GMT -8
An interesting thought...not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet, but yes, although we may be a decent-sized market, I just don't think we're a "sports" market, unfortunately. Who knows if that has had any influence on or past, current, or future aspirations to switch conferences? Cal & Stanford aren't "sports" markets either. Neither is UCLA unless they are winning. USC is relatively consistent. I dunno about that...the Bay Area is pretty fanatical about their sports. Just ask any Giants fan; they'll tell you how great their team is and how their fans are the best and smartest in the world. Also, within about 50 miles, you have a lot of professional sports teams (Niners, Giants, Raiders, A's, Warriors, Sharks). Cal and Stanford are right in the middle of that if you ask me. UCLA and USC are in LA, which also has a rich history of winning championships (both professional and at the collegiate level). So I guess the question really is: what does it take to be a "true" sports market? A history of championship teams? An area of the country with nothing else going on besides sports?
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Apr 27, 2016 5:47:17 GMT -8
Cal & Stanford aren't "sports" markets either. Neither is UCLA unless they are winning. USC is relatively consistent. I dunno about that...the Bay Area is pretty fanatical about their sports. Just ask any Giants fan; they'll tell you how great their team is and how their fans are the best and smartest in the world. Also, within about 50 miles, you have a lot of professional sports teams (Niners, Giants, Raiders, A's, Warriors, Sharks). Cal and Stanford are right in the middle of that if you ask me. UCLA and USC are in LA, which also has a rich history of winning championships (both professional and at the collegiate level). So I guess the question really is: what does it take to be a "true" sports market? A history of championship teams? An area of the country with nothing else going on besides sports? I was referring more to those specific schools more than their particular surrounding "sports markets."
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Apr 27, 2016 7:49:55 GMT -8
Coug please innumerate on how the MW is better then the AAC in Conference Leadership , Future, Direction, RECRUITING areas ( the key to any team in improving is getting better recruits , especially in states that have numerous high quality recruits - compare Texas and SE to the Mountain States of Wyoming,New Mexico, UT, Idaho , opportunities for a better TV deal - other then for BSU ?, Where could AAC be With SDSU and another team from the West - where will MW be with Out SDSU and ?, placing teams in Bowls and location of those Bowls, preferred rival Navy vs AFA ? Could the TV network say , you lost SDSU and ? so time to take a closer look at the TV deal ? Would guess many fans would say our rivals in MBB has been UNLV and Lobos battles for first place- . Football and MBB it was BYU - because of the battle for first place . So if SDSU was battling Houston for titles every year or .... they would become quick rivals .
You did say that the other members of the conference were correct that the MW T should be played on UNLV's home court, rather then say another facility in Las Vegas and there should not be more OOC games and less MW Conference games . Major reason because the other schools - led by the Mountain schools thought it was correct - great example of poor leadership and direction and money . Coach Fisher prefers both more OOC games and not playing the MW T on UNLV's home court but then again he is in the minority of the MW so his thoughts are not correct but the Mountain schools - who have a difficult time getting quality OOC games are .
|
|
|
Post by haroldskilley on Apr 27, 2016 7:50:38 GMT -8
Intermediate Plan (bridge between MWC to P5 conference) is to partner with BYU and Hawaii, and have SDSU go Independent.
SDSU could then join the Big West in basketball (with Hawaii), and get its own TV deal for football. For football, SDSU would have 6-7 home games that it could sell to a TV partner. Maybe a mix of 3-4 games to NBC Sports Network or ESPN, and the remaining 2-3 games to Fox Sports San Diego.
So why would partnering with BYU and Hawaii be worth it? If you can get 3-4 schools to all go indy, then you solve the late season scheduling challenge, and can partner with the other indy schools for bowl ties.
SEPT - 4 OCC games (vs the PAC12 and P5s) OCT - 4 games (maybe vs MWC, AAC, other P5s) NOV - 4 games (vs BYU, Hawaii, 1 FCS, 1 SEC--who plays OOC games in November). Annual rivalry games in November would be vs BYU and Hawaii.
Although not as good as being in the PAC12, this would be an upgrade in exposure, TV money, and provide more games that fans care about. BYU and Hawaii would be willing partners, just because of scheduling.
The alternative is staying the course in the MWC, and playing a schedule vs Wyoming, CSU, UNM, UNLV, and USU on CBS Sports Network.
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Apr 27, 2016 9:30:22 GMT -8
PAC is Never going to let SDSU in . Everybody as old as you seems to feel that way. Those of us who aren't so old aren't so totally negative in our thinking.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2016 9:35:40 GMT -8
Intermediate Plan (bridge between MWC to P5 conference) is to partner with BYU and Hawaii, and have SDSU go Independent. SDSU could then join the Big West in basketball (with Hawaii), and get its own TV deal for football. For football, SDSU would have 6-7 home games that it could sell to a TV partner. Maybe a mix of 3-4 games to NBC Sports Network or ESPN, and the remaining 2-3 games to Fox Sports San Diego. So why would partnering with BYU and Hawaii be worth it? If you can get 3-4 schools to all go indy, then you solve the late season scheduling challenge, and can partner with the other indy schools for bowl ties. SEPT - 4 OCC games (vs the PAC12 and P5s) OCT - 4 games (maybe vs MWC, AAC, other P5s) NOV - 4 games (vs BYU, Hawaii, 1 FCS, 1 SEC--who plays OOC games in November). Annual rivalry games in November would be vs BYU and Hawaii. Although not as good as being in the PAC12, this would be an upgrade in exposure, TV money, and provide more games that fans care about. BYU and Hawaii would be willing partners, just because of scheduling. The alternative is staying the course in the MWC, and playing a schedule vs Wyoming, CSU, UNM, UNLV, and USU on CBS Sports Network. I think the key to this plan is getting Boise to go indy as well. BSU, SDSU, Hawaii, and BYU would play each other the last month of the season and position 3 of the 4 for a move to the AAC or BOR down the line, whichever makes the most sense depending on what happens with realignment.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Apr 27, 2016 9:42:08 GMT -8
Those who say we have no chance of ever being invited to the P12 are living in the past -- when SDSU was a nice little 4-yr. college on the Mesa. It's not that anymore. Its academic standing has gone from almost non-existent to higher than four of the P12 schools (and soon to be five or six.) The entire deal hinges on the MV West expansion. Should that turn into reality, the P12 will be forced to let us in. Part of the plan for the expansion is the establishment of a research component for the university and the possibility of granting Ph.D.s and conducting research, perhaps stand-alone, or perhaps in conjunction with UCSD on the site. The MV West expansion will push SDSU's enrollment to 45k to 50k+, making SDSU among the 10 largest universities in the U.S. -- all of whom are P5 schools. With our new stadium, excellent location for hosting bowl games, etc., it will be extremely difficult for a P5 conference to ignore us. And if the B12 starts sniffing around, the P12 will definitely snap us up. The last thing in the world they want is the B12 dipping into their Calif. recruiting pool. And, no, we don't have to wait 7 to 10 years to bust down the doors. If we have a plan in place and MV West is approved and in the works -- 2 to 4 years from now -- a conference might want to include us as a pre-emptive strike. So, yeah, MV West is massively critical to SDSU's sports program and it future. Without it, we're doomed to the bottom-feeding has beens of the MGC. Uh, no it won't. Sorry, but UCLA, Cal, Stanford, and USC will never, NEVER change their minds regarding SDSU. For them, San Diego State will always be "a nice little 4-yr. college on the Mesa." You, I, and objective observers may agree that SDSU has risen like a rocket in the academic firmament. But the Pac-12 people are NOT objective observers. SDSU is a threat to their dominance in recruiting in San Diego County. We would also be a threat to start recruiting many of the 3, 4, and even 5 star athletes in Los Angeles County, Orange County, and the Inland Empire that previously were easily captured by Pac-12 schools. I don't know the details that lead to the entry of the Arizona schools to the make the Pac-8 and Pac-10 in the late '70s, but one thing is certain. Those schools were not in the prime recruiting area of Southern California. That is not the case in with the SDSU. I agree that the one thing that could change this situation is the possibility of a Big-12 invitation. However, I do not feel that such an invitation given to SDSU is likely. BYU and Cincinnati are both considered, and rightly so, the likely candidates for Big-12 expansion. Those two schools would bring the Big-12 to twelve members. If that happens, SDSU would have to pray for the Big-12 to then expand to 14 members. Good luck with that. Twelve members is quite possible, 14 seems like wishful thinking to me. AzWm
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Apr 27, 2016 10:00:21 GMT -8
As the guy partly responsible for pushing the "move to the AAC" concept here late last year, let me respond to a few things that have been mentioned here. 1. The AAC's TV contract is just as bad as the MW's - true, but one of the possibilities opening up is the big move by Fox to acquire half of the B1G's tier 1 rights. Speculation is that ESPN, after losing out on that deal, might turn to the AAC. While the AAC certainly can't replace the B1G, it's better than nothing and just moving their games off ESPN News could result in a much better contract. I'm not sold on this theory, myself, since ESPN is in a world of financial hurt, so we'll wait and see how this plays out. 2. Just win, which got Utah and TCU into the P5 - explain Colorado. OK, the Denver TV market. It's still about TV markets. 3. Mission Valley will take seven years - if the Chargers initiative qualifies and passes, it will probably take that long to get downtown built and then the Aztecs stadium constructed. On the other hand, I can see SDSU playing in the downtown facility for several years. OTOH, two-thirds is a huge threshold. The land could very well be available in a few years with the Bolts playing second fiddle in Inglewood. I'd still prefer a stadium squeezed onto the main campus and Mission Valley utilized fully for academic expansion. It's a bigger win for both projects.
4. A Mission Valley stadium will force the Pac-12's hand - No, strong TV ratings for the Aztecs in San Diego in a few years might merit some Pac-12 consideration. Maybe. The Pac-12 TV situation is looking dire and while SDSU might not help much, San Diego itself might if we have any reason to watch. I, too, would love to have a stadium on Montezuma Mesa. However, there are enough obstacles in the way of getting that done to force one to conclude that the odds of making that a reality are very, very long. I mean loooooong!
A Mission Valley SDSU expansion is obviously that way to go, but not just for non-athletic purposes. Parking and freeway access are there already. Also, as I believe is happening at Colorado State, classrooms can be built into any new stadium. We should focus on a West Campus that includes academic, research, housing, and stadium components.
As far as the Pac-12 is concerned, the West Campus would be a nice place for them to visit, but it would not in and of itself cause them to change their minds about inviting SDSU to join. Their prejudice against SDSU is solid and goes back generations. AzWm
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Apr 27, 2016 10:10:07 GMT -8
The PAC as of today has no plans to expand . are more then willing to stand pat with their current schools. Many say IF they wanted to expand it would be Texas and The Sooners . Aztec AD Sterk ( former AD in PAC does communicate with them and they are telling him SDSU is not on their radar . Major reason PAC will not et SDSU in is Recruiting . As of now any 5 or 4 star recruit will very likely select a PAC school , part of the P5 . SDSU is a G5 school , so if we became a member of the PAC it would elevate SDSU to the same level as every other PAC school , so there is No way that happens
INDY : BYU with its national following is having problems , so there is very little chance SDSU could make it work . BSU would not give up its sweet deal for football TV money .
|
|