|
Post by northcountymike on Apr 27, 2016 11:54:17 GMT -8
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." Way to back track . A "market" isn't a 2-square mile designation of what to show on tv, based on a college campus. You know it and I know it. And if you were referring just to those schools, I think both have a larger pull and a bigger audience that's a lot more "national" than we've ever been. So, do you still think the Bay Area, scratch that, Cal and Stanford, aren't "sports markets?"
|
|
|
Post by uncledougy on Apr 27, 2016 13:11:03 GMT -8
Regarding moving to AAC, it's just putting a different color lipstick on the pig. Not much improves with the pig skin, but round ball would suffer WAY TOO MUCH to make it worthwhile. Might as well just kill all hoops momentum going to the bus league. You can't sell any top recruit on the BW.
We are where we will be for quite some time. Conference quality is cyclical...it will come back around.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Apr 27, 2016 13:39:55 GMT -8
I was referring more to those specific schools more than their particular surrounding "sports markets." Way to back track . A "market" isn't a 2-square mile designation of what to show on tv, based on a college campus. You know it and I know it. And if you were referring just to those schools, I think both have a larger pull and a bigger audience that's a lot more "national" than we've ever been. So, do you still think the Bay Area, scratch that, Cal and Stanford, aren't "sports markets?" To compare Cal and Stanford to SDSU is folly. If SDSU had the same resources as Cal and Stanford and was in the PAC 12 without question we would be a bigger draw than they are.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2016 13:46:57 GMT -8
Way to back track . A "market" isn't a 2-square mile designation of what to show on tv, based on a college campus. You know it and I know it. And if you were referring just to those schools, I think both have a larger pull and a bigger audience that's a lot more "national" than we've ever been. So, do you still think the Bay Area, scratch that, Cal and Stanford, aren't "sports markets?" To compare Cal and Stanford to SDSU is folly. If SDSU had the same resources as Cal and Stanford and was in the PAC 12 without question we would be a bigger draw than they are. Stanford wasn't even all that popular recently in the Bay Area until their more recent success. Winning cures most things, we all know this. Especially on the left coast.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Apr 27, 2016 14:09:38 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. You might call it negativity--others might call it being realistic. As much as I would LOVE to see SDSU join the Pac whatever, I just don't see it happening.
|
|
|
Post by northcountymike on Apr 27, 2016 15:31:45 GMT -8
To compare Cal and Stanford to SDSU is folly. If SDSU had the same resources as Cal and Stanford and was in the PAC 12 without question we would be a bigger draw than they are. Stanford wasn't even all that popular recently in the Bay Area until their more recent success. Winning cures most things, we all know this. Especially on the left coast. Precisely, but look at them now. They're in the same market as professional teams that have had a rich history of success.
|
|
|
Post by northcountymike on Apr 27, 2016 15:39:57 GMT -8
Way to back track . A "market" isn't a 2-square mile designation of what to show on tv, based on a college campus. You know it and I know it. And if you were referring just to those schools, I think both have a larger pull and a bigger audience that's a lot more "national" than we've ever been. So, do you still think the Bay Area, scratch that, Cal and Stanford, aren't "sports markets?" To compare Cal and Stanford to SDSU is folly. If SDSU had the same resources as Cal and Stanford and was in the PAC 12 without question we would be a bigger draw than they are. Unfortunately, you started the whole thing by mentioning Cal and Stanford as not "sports markets." If you didn't want people to call you out on it, you probably shouldn't have mentioned them, sorry. Regarding the "resources," I think SDSU has plenty of resources...they just don't have the same history of winning (or the annoying, almost constant reminder of how "good" of an academic institution that Stanford has). Another poster kind of mentioned it and I agree: winning creates resources. Furthermore, to keep complaining about "resources" just perpetuates a cycle of "woe is me" and that we can never be great because we're being held down. We're the only ones holding us down. We should be better than that by now; we're a huge institution with lots of famous alumni, D-1 sports programs, and America's Finest City in our school's name.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2016 15:44:18 GMT -8
Stanford wasn't even all that popular recently in the Bay Area until their more recent success. Winning cures most things, we all know this. Especially on the left coast. Precisely, but look at them now. They're in the same market as professional teams that have had a rich history of success. Very true. But 2003 is also correct to bring up the resources gap. Specifically I think coaching salaries play a huge role.
|
|
|
Post by northcountymike on Apr 27, 2016 17:19:34 GMT -8
Precisely, but look at them now. They're in the same market as professional teams that have had a rich history of success. Very true. But 2003 is also correct to bring up the resources gap. Specifically I think coaching salaries play a huge role. While the "resources" argument may have a little leverage, how long are we going to keep claiming it? We keep saying how we don't have the resources which, to me, contributes to the overall "woe is us" mentality; a mentality that can't seem to get past that perception and keeps us stuck where we are. It's a nice excuse to have sometimes, but eventually, we're gonna have to take control of our own destiny.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Apr 27, 2016 17:59:16 GMT -8
Very true. But 2003 is also correct to bring up the resources gap. Specifically I think coaching salaries play a huge role. While the "resources" argument may have a little leverage, how long are we going to keep claiming it? We keep saying how we don't have the resources which, to me, contributes to the overall "woe is us" mentality; a mentality that can't seem to get past that perception and keeps us stuck where we are. It's a nice excuse to have sometimes, but eventually, we're gonna have to take control of our own destiny. "Take control of our own destiny" = build "SDSU WEST"
|
|
|
Post by longtimebooster on Apr 27, 2016 18:59:18 GMT -8
Geezus. Look 10 years ahead. It's not about today, it's about the future.
And screw BYU and Cincinnati. Those are nonsense schools.
As I posted on this board's predecessor in 1997 and at least once a year or more since, the best option for SDSU is to team with UNLV. Both schools need to expand their campuses, significantly upgrade their academics (add a research component and med school in UNLV's case, and build state-of-the-art on-campus stadia. (UNLV is very close to building a stadium across from the Thomas Mack on the strip.)
Vegas and San Diego are by far the two biggest/best markets west of the Mississippi. And they're also among the fastest-growing. Additionally, they provide world-class venues locals for conference events, playoffs, fan destinations, etc., etc., which are becoming much more significant/important.
I laid this out 20 years ago, and now it's so close to happening, we can almost taste it.
And, no, the recruiting hotbed theory is fun and nice, but if TV tells the P12 that it wants to add the San Diego and Vegas markets, then the P12 will do it.
Finally, Texas won't ever join the P12. It's just geographically and psychologically too distant from California and the West Coast. Not a natural fit.
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Apr 27, 2016 19:12:44 GMT -8
West
SDSU UNLV BYU AFA Houston SMU
East Temple Navy Memphis UC USF UCF
It would be so perfect, 16 games basketball schedule and likley 4 to 6 teams in the NCAAs.
A 13-0 team from that conference would have a chance to get into the 4 team semis on occasion.
And each school would get around $8m per instead of what we get now.
|
|
|
Post by chris92065 on Apr 27, 2016 21:15:04 GMT -8
Geezus. Look 10 years ahead. It's not about today, it's about the future. And screw BYU and Cincinnati. Those are nonsense schools. As I posted on this board's predecessor in 1997 and at least once a year or more since, the best option for SDSU is to team with UNLV. Both schools need to expand their campuses, significantly upgrade their academics (add a research component and med school in UNLV's case, and build state-of-the-art on-campus stadia. (UNLV is very close to building a stadium across from the Thomas Mack on the strip.) Vegas and San Diego are by far the two biggest/best markets west of the Mississippi. And they're also among the fastest-growing. Additionally, they provide world-class venues locals for conference events, playoffs, fan destinations, etc., etc., which are becoming much more significant/important. I laid this out 20 years ago, and now it's so close to happening, we can almost taste it. And, no, the recruiting hotbed theory is fun and nice, but if TV tells the P12 that it wants to add the San Diego and Vegas markets, then the P12 will do it. Finally, Texas won't ever join the P12. It's just geographically and psychologically too distant from California and the West Coast. Not a natural fit. If Texas goes anywhere it will Be sec. Also, agree about unlv. Perfect partner.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2016 21:21:32 GMT -8
Very true. But 2003 is also correct to bring up the resources gap. Specifically I think coaching salaries play a huge role. While the "resources" argument may have a little leverage, how long are we going to keep claiming it? We keep saying how we don't have the resources which, to me, contributes to the overall "woe is us" mentality; a mentality that can't seem to get past that perception and keeps us stuck where we are. It's a nice excuse to have sometimes, but eventually, we're gonna have to take control of our own destiny. As long as it exists? Seems like the correct answer to me because that is in fact what the issue is... money. (in my opinion only of course)
|
|
|
Post by McQuervo on Apr 27, 2016 23:00:22 GMT -8
West SDSU UNLV BYU AFA Houston SMU East Temple Navy Memphis UC USF UCF It would be so perfect, 16 games basketball schedule and likley 4 to 6 teams in the NCAAs. A 13-0 team from that conference would have a chance to get into the 4 team semis on occasion. And each school would get around $8m per instead of what we get now. Tweak: Drop BYF'U add CSU or even Boise Otherwise, I believe this may be the best short term approach. As for the Pac 12, UCLA and Stanford made it very clear they don't want SDSU 20+ years ago. The ONLY way we would get into the Pac 12 is for the TV networks to recommend our entry. That's it, all about the TV revenues.
|
|
|
Post by northcountymike on Apr 28, 2016 1:13:32 GMT -8
While the "resources" argument may have a little leverage, how long are we going to keep claiming it? We keep saying how we don't have the resources which, to me, contributes to the overall "woe is us" mentality; a mentality that can't seem to get past that perception and keeps us stuck where we are. It's a nice excuse to have sometimes, but eventually, we're gonna have to take control of our own destiny. As long as it exists? Seems like the correct answer to me because that is in fact what the issue is... money. (in my opinion only of course) We don't have to go down this road again...we'll always have an excuse for something. Plenty of teams have done more with just as much or less than us (football or basketball, etc.). If we keep whining like we are, then we'll only ever be satisfied when we reach a certain point and then lose because "oh well, we just didn't have the resources." It's a cop-out and an excuse that "new" or from-out-of-state fans seem to gravitate towards. It's the same mindset that plagues our city's professional teams; it's complacency and it's weak. It's a mindset that doesn't demand actual results and that's why the Padres and Chargers are still around, as well as a few posters on this board that are more than content to see their favorite team lose because they can always chalk it up to "not having the resources to compete." Heck, why even play the game?
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Apr 28, 2016 6:50:13 GMT -8
West SDSU UNLV BYU AFA Houston SMU East Temple Navy Memphis UC USF UCF It would be so perfect, 16 games basketball schedule and likley 4 to 6 teams in the NCAAs. A 13-0 team from that conference would have a chance to get into the 4 team semis on occasion. And each school would get around $8m per instead of what we get now. Tweak: Drop BYF'U add CSU or even Boise Otherwise, I believe this may be the best short term approach. As for the Pac 12, UCLA and Stanford made it very clear they don't want SDSU 20+ years ago. The ONLY way we would get into the Pac 12 is for the TV networks to recommend our entry. That's it, all about the TV revenues.SDSU has changed dramatically the last 10 years let alone the 20. When SDSU WEST breaks ground & is completed SDSU will pass several schools in the PAC 12 in regards to academics. It will catapult SDSU into an elite research university. In addition, SDSU will be one of the top 10 largest public universities in the nation. SDSU is already in the #28 market, is a recruiting hotbed, a destination city, close geographic location, and has strong athletic programs. There will come a point where even UCLA & Stanford won't be able to make a legitimate argument against SDSU as a prime P5 candidate. Particularly when SDSU WEST is completed.
|
|
|
Post by chris92065 on Apr 28, 2016 8:06:12 GMT -8
2003
I hope your right. In fact, I pray your right.
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Apr 28, 2016 8:33:32 GMT -8
A couple of things - PAC vote has ZERO to do with any form of academics . College Sports is primarily funded by TV deals with conferences . So any school that is added to a conference is to provide more TV income . The other important factor is Recruiting - currently any 5 star , most 4 star recruits and even some 3 star recruits want to go to a P5 school . So no PAC school wants to elevate SDSU from a G5 to P5 level . So even OSU , WSU , ..... do NOT want to compete with SDSU for recruits , that would be foolish . That is also why Houston and SMU have little chance of getting into the B12 .
AAC was smart they put a 10 million dollar exit fee for schools leaving their conference . So those schools would not have the money to jump to New Conference . All SDSU needs is one other school from the West area to go to AAC . There is no need to bring more than 1 school from West area . Schools added need to bring better TV markets only . Navy is in the AAC and would be better rival then AFA . Do not need more mountain schools .
|
|
|
Post by fowl on Apr 28, 2016 10:05:22 GMT -8
A couple of things - PAC vote has ZERO to do with any form of academics . College Sports is primarily funded by TV deals with conferences . So any school that is added to a conference is to provide more TV income . The other important factor is Recruiting - currently any 5 star , most 4 star recruits and even some 3 star recruits want to go to a P5 school . So no PAC school wants to elevate SDSU from a G5 to P5 level . So even OSU , WSU , ..... do NOT want to compete with SDSU for recruits , that would be foolish . That is also why Houston and SMU have little chance of getting into the B12 . This is just patently wrong on ALL accounts.
|
|