|
Post by Den60 on Sept 11, 2019 16:34:37 GMT -8
I don’t know if the pac 12 will survive in its current form for much longer. The TV situation is flat out debacle on biblical proportions. I may be way off base but they are by far the worst of the P5. In fact, the PAC is closer to the MWC and AAC then they are a P5 conference. It seems more likely that the big 12 will try to poach 2 schools the next round of TV negotiations then PAC expanding. The PAC network is a joke. Larry Scott is about as good a commissioner as Craig THOMPSON. Don’t get me wrong, i would join the PAC in a second, I am just predicting the college landscape is going to change drastically by 2025. We just need a brand new kick ass stadium built and mission valley expansion well under way by then to put us in a position to find a chair at the big boy table in whatever P5 conference takes us before the dust settles. So does the B12 try to take a couple of P12 schools or the other way around? I hope the B12 takes a couple of P12 schools as that may be the door opening we need. Honestly, I don't know who'd they take though. CU and UU would make the most sense to join the B12, but I doubt that's who they'd want. I can't really see any of the other schools leaving besides those 2 though and I doubt UU would even go. If the P12 takes 2 B12 schools, which I also doubt can happen unless its the 2 OK schools, then the B12 will simply back fill with eastern schools. Personally, I think the PAC-12 tries to get Oklahoma and Texas though the Big10 would likely do the same. You could probably replace Texas Tech with either one of those schools in that particular conversation. Whoever loses may look at the other schools in the conference as a consolation prize. If P5 conferences all go to 16 teams we could get a look from the PAC12 based on market size and proximity, but I'm not holding my breath. I see our best opportunity would be to combine the best of the MWC with the best remnants of the Big12 and be "the best of the rest" which would likely include YBU. Now, if we could elevate our university academic standing with something like a law school and get rid of the need to pair with a UC school to issue PHd's then we would get a harder look by the PAC-12. But even with that, LA has always tried to keep San Diego down when it comes to sports. We are the 7th largest city in the nation and, yet, only have one professional sports team in any major sport. LA/OC has two of each, including soccer.
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Sept 11, 2019 16:55:05 GMT -8
So does the B12 try to take a couple of P12 schools or the other way around? I hope the B12 takes a couple of P12 schools as that may be the door opening we need. Honestly, I don't know who'd they take though. CU and UU would make the most sense to join the B12, but I doubt that's who they'd want. I can't really see any of the other schools leaving besides those 2 though and I doubt UU would even go. If the P12 takes 2 B12 schools, which I also doubt can happen unless its the 2 OK schools, then the B12 will simply back fill with eastern schools. Personally, I think the PAC-12 tries to get Oklahoma and Texas though the Big10 would likely do the same. You could probably replace Texas Tech with either one of those schools in that particular conversation. Whoever loses may look at the other schools in the conference as a consolation prize. If P5 conferences all go to 16 teams we could get a look from the PAC12 based on market size and proximity, but I'm not holding my breath. I see our best opportunity would be to combine the best of the MWC with the best remnants of the Big12 and be "the best of the rest" which would likely include YBU. Now, if we could elevate our university academic standing with something like a law school and get rid of the need to pair with a UC school to issue PHd's then we would get a harder look by the PAC-12. But even with that, LA has always tried to keep San Diego down when it comes to sports. We are the 7th largest city in the nation and, yet, only have one professional sports team in any major sport. LA/OC has two of each, including soccer. The PAC12 is not attracting anyone: The most likely scenario would be the Big 10 adding Texas and Oklahoma.
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Sept 11, 2019 17:09:33 GMT -8
Let's say the Big 10 takes Oklahoma and Texas to get to 14 members. That will leave the following schools:
Baylor TCU ISU KSU KU TTECH Oklahoma State WVU
The political pressure may be too great and TTECH and OSU will go to the Big 12 as well. Iowa State will be in a hard spot with no leverage and not sure if Iowa would actually help them or not.
That would put 16 teams in the Big10
And Leave the following schools Baylor TCU ISU KSU KU WVU
The ACC may take a hard look at adding WVU, in the footprint, and for argument sakes, let's say they do pick them up. That will create a lottery ticket for a team on the east coast, which one? It would most likely be one out of the AAC or Army.
That leaves the following: Baylor TCU ISU KSU KU
The PAC would not have interest in TCU and Baylor for cultural reasons (right or wrong) and not sure they would have interest in KU, KSU, or ISU. I just don't see them adding anyone from that pool. OU and Tejas are the drivers for the B12. I think you find a situation where the MW and AAC open their doors for these five schools. Most like TCU and Baylor joining the AAC and KSU, ISU, and KU joining the MW.
Seems odd, but that is how I see the musical chairs. That would leave someone out west with a golden ticket even BYU joining the fold. But the whole thing is based on of OU and Tejas want to move.
|
|
|
Post by retiredaztec on Sept 11, 2019 17:46:51 GMT -8
Wow. Some really intense posts on this thread, including how college football will look west of the Rockies. I'm sure those universities impacted will appreciate your input regarding their future. I also received an email to participate in a "university wide strategic planning process". Yep, pretty intense.
I know this remains nothing more than an opinion board, but as we enter the tenth month of the vote that allowed all this to happen, is there any update in the world of reality?
Personally, I'm still waiting to hear how all this is going to be paid for. I guess that will happen when the vision is complete, right?
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Sept 11, 2019 17:52:27 GMT -8
Wow. Some really intense posts on this thread, including how college football will look west of the Rockies. I'm sure those universities impacted will appreciate your input regarding their future. I also received an email to participate in a "university wide strategic planning process". Yep, pretty intense. I know this remains nothing more than an opinion board, but as we enter the tenth month of the vote that allowed all this to happen, is there any update in the world of reality? Personally, I'm still waiting to hear how all this is going to be paid for. I guess that will happen when the vision is complete, right?
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Sept 12, 2019 11:40:12 GMT -8
Personally, I think the PAC-12 tries to get Oklahoma and Texas though the Big10 would likely do the same. You could probably replace Texas Tech with either one of those schools in that particular conversation. Whoever loses may look at the other schools in the conference as a consolation prize. If P5 conferences all go to 16 teams we could get a look from the PAC12 based on market size and proximity, but I'm not holding my breath. I see our best opportunity would be to combine the best of the MWC with the best remnants of the Big12 and be "the best of the rest" which would likely include YBU. Now, if we could elevate our university academic standing with something like a law school and get rid of the need to pair with a UC school to issue PHd's then we would get a harder look by the PAC-12. But even with that, LA has always tried to keep San Diego down when it comes to sports. We are the 7th largest city in the nation and, yet, only have one professional sports team in any major sport. LA/OC has two of each, including soccer. The PAC12 is not attracting anyone: The most likely scenario would be the Big 10 adding Texas and Oklahoma. No way the B1G adds Texas and their LHN... if UT drops the network then the B1G would consider the addition... not likely... I really don’t see the B1G adding OU and OSU. I can see the B12 adding Colorado and Utah to get back to 12 teams and those teams can get paid more in the B12... P12 would them be sitting at 10 teams...
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Sept 12, 2019 14:49:08 GMT -8
The PAC12 is not attracting anyone: The most likely scenario would be the Big 10 adding Texas and Oklahoma. No way the B1G adds Texas and their LHN... if UT drops the network then the B1G would consider the addition... not likely... I really don’t see the B1G adding OU and OSU. I can see the B12 adding Colorado and Utah to get back to 12 teams and those teams can get paid more in the B12... P12 would them be sitting at 10 teams... Interesting, I don't think the BIG12 contract would increase $68M per year to bring in CU and Utah. For argument's sake, let's say they did, what's in it for the other members of the BiG12? Their payout would remain the same. An interesting move would be SC and one other PAC12 school moving to the Big 12, SC may be worth $68M by itself. Or even picture UW, UO, SC, and UCLA moving to the Big 12. All just mental gymnastics. But I wonder How SC feels about getting almost 1/2 of what Maryland, Indiana, Northwestern, Rutgers, Purdue, Iowa, and Minnesota receive?
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Sept 13, 2019 8:26:04 GMT -8
So now, the apparent hold-up in the (allegedly secret) negotiations for the purchase of the SDCCU Stadium site is the building of a bridge, extending Fenton Parkway over the SD River to connect with Camino del Rio North. Apparently, according to Squirmin' Scott Sherman, he wants SDSU to pay for at least part of that bridge--a bridge that has been planned for since the 1980's. I wonder how much Sherman expected the boys at Soccer City to pony up for their share of this long-planned bridge? Sherman claims that SDSU will benefit the most from the proposed bridge, so he wants SDSU to pay a substantial portion of the cost. Sherman is a fool.
|
|
|
Post by Boise Aztec on Sept 13, 2019 10:15:14 GMT -8
No way the B1G adds Texas and their LHN... if UT drops the network then the B1G would consider the addition... not likely... I really don’t see the B1G adding OU and OSU. I can see the B12 adding Colorado and Utah to get back to 12 teams and those teams can get paid more in the B12... P12 would them be sitting at 10 teams... Interesting, I don't think the BIG12 contract would increase $68M per year to bring in CU and Utah. For argument's sake, let's say they did, what's in it for the other members of the BiG12? Their payout would remain the same. An interesting move would be SC and one other PAC12 school moving to the Big 12, SC may be worth $68M by itself. Or even picture UW, UO, SC, and UCLA moving to the Big 12. All just mental gymnastics. But I wonder How SC feels about getting almost 1/2 of what Maryland, Indiana, Northwestern, Rutgers, Purdue, Iowa, and Minnesota receive? Great points... it really is about inventory and two more teams gives you about 14 more games to telecast, but you are correct Col/UU may not be enough... U$C however would be huge... it would be pretty easy for the two private schools to get away, Stanford and $C as part of the B12 would add value to the conference no doubt.
|
|
|
Post by junior on Sept 13, 2019 14:15:13 GMT -8
So now, the apparent hold-up in the (allegedly secret) negotiations for the purchase of the SDCCU Stadium site is the building of a bridge, extending Fenton Parkway over the SD River to connect with Camino del Rio North. Apparently, according to Squirmin' Scott Sherman, he wants SDSU to pay for at least part of that bridge--a bridge that has been planned for since the 1980's. I wonder how much Sherman expected the boys at Soccer City to pony up for their share of this long-planned bridge? Sherman claims that SDSU will benefit the most from the proposed bridge, so he wants SDSU to pay a substantial portion of the cost. Sherman is a fool. Squirmin' Scott Sherman can't be termed out too soon. Worse, is that the district he represents has had nothing but buffoons from McCarty, to Madhatter, to now, Squirmin' Sherman. WTF is up with the voters in District 7, anyway? Not one of these clowns have ever represented any of MY concerns on the Council. Hopefully, the voters in District 7 will elect someone who cares more about the future rather than trying to recapture some vague memory of the past… So this fool will hold negotiations hostage for a $28m bridge from Ikea to Whatever. Term him out now.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Sept 13, 2019 14:24:22 GMT -8
So now, the apparent hold-up in the (allegedly secret) negotiations for the purchase of the SDCCU Stadium site is the building of a bridge, extending Fenton Parkway over the SD River to connect with Camino del Rio North. Apparently, according to Squirmin' Scott Sherman, he wants SDSU to pay for at least part of that bridge--a bridge that has been planned for since the 1980's. I wonder how much Sherman expected the boys at Soccer City to pony up for their share of this long-planned bridge? Sherman claims that SDSU will benefit the most from the proposed bridge, so he wants SDSU to pay a substantial portion of the cost. Sherman is a fool. Squirmin' Scott Sherman can't be termed out too soon. Worse, is that the district he represents has had nothing but buffoons from McCarty, to Madhatter, to now, Squirmin' Sherman. WTF is up with the voters in District 7, anyway? Not one of these clowns have ever represented any of MY concerns on the Council. Hopefully, the voters in District 7 will elect someone who cares more about the future rather than trying to recapture some vague memory of the past… So this fool will hold negotiations hostage for a $28m bridge from Ikea to Whatever. Term him out now. Still insanely bitter about the failure of Soccer City.
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Sept 13, 2019 14:33:26 GMT -8
So now, the apparent hold-up in the (allegedly secret) negotiations for the purchase of the SDCCU Stadium site is the building of a bridge, extending Fenton Parkway over the SD River to connect with Camino del Rio North. Apparently, according to Squirmin' Scott Sherman, he wants SDSU to pay for at least part of that bridge--a bridge that has been planned for since the 1980's. I wonder how much Sherman expected the boys at Soccer City to pony up for their share of this long-planned bridge? Sherman claims that SDSU will benefit the most from the proposed bridge, so he wants SDSU to pay a substantial portion of the cost. Sherman is a fool. It isn't unusual for governments to ask for capital improvements, especially for traffic, when looking at new development.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Sept 13, 2019 14:40:32 GMT -8
So now, the apparent hold-up in the (allegedly secret) negotiations for the purchase of the SDCCU Stadium site is the building of a bridge, extending Fenton Parkway over the SD River to connect with Camino del Rio North. Apparently, according to Squirmin' Scott Sherman, he wants SDSU to pay for at least part of that bridge--a bridge that has been planned for since the 1980's. I wonder how much Sherman expected the boys at Soccer City to pony up for their share of this long-planned bridge? Sherman claims that SDSU will benefit the most from the proposed bridge, so he wants SDSU to pay a substantial portion of the cost. Sherman is a fool. It isn't unusual for governments to ask for capital improvements, especially for traffic, when looking at new development. Of course it isn't. But that bridge has allegedly been in the planning stages for over 30 years, and the area that bridge would REALLY help is the Fenton Marketplace, and I don't recall any great push for that bridge back when Fenton Marketplace was built. I don't see how Squirmin' Scott Sherman can claim that SDSU would stand to gain the most from that bridge.
|
|
|
Post by jp92grad on Sept 13, 2019 15:38:26 GMT -8
It isn't unusual for governments to ask for capital improvements, especially for traffic, when looking at new development. Of course it isn't. But that bridge has allegedly been in the planning stages for over 30 years, and the area that bridge would REALLY help is the Fenton Marketplace, and I don't recall any great push for that bridge back when Fenton Marketplace was built. I don't see how Squirmin' Scott Sherman can claim that SDSU would stand to gain the most from that bridge. Isn't Turd Shermans time about up? I still think that retiredaztec and Turd Sherman are the same people. I could see a small (very small) percentage or contribution toward building but not much (just like, as per noted above). This is not really going to benefit or be impacted by the SDSU West area. This was and has been in the works for years and years and never acted upon. This is more about Fenton and the housing north and west of shopping center. What and where is the monies that those developers put into the bridge back in the day? NOT really SDSU problem, this only serves small access roads in and around the area. This is more of a traffic easing idea for the whole area almost like giving alternatives for EMS (which is needed). ***This should have had plans on the table from years ago with documented activators put into place when such and such were met!
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Sept 13, 2019 16:39:27 GMT -8
Of course it isn't. But that bridge has allegedly been in the planning stages for over 30 years, and the area that bridge would REALLY help is the Fenton Marketplace, and I don't recall any great push for that bridge back when Fenton Marketplace was built. I don't see how Squirmin' Scott Sherman can claim that SDSU would stand to gain the most from that bridge. Isn't Turd Shermans time about up? I still think that retiredaztec and Turd Sherman are the same people. I could see a small (very small) percentage or contribution toward building but not much as per noted above. This is not really going to benefit or be impacted by the SDSU West area. This was and has been in the works for years and years and never acted upon. This is more about Fenton and the housing north and west of shopping center. What and where is the monies that those developers put into the bridge back in the day? NOT really SDSU problem, this only serves small access roads in and around the area. This is more of a traffic easing idea for the whole area almost like giving alternatives for EMS (which is needed). ***This should have had plans on the table from years ago with documented activators put into place when such and such were met! The Squirmin' One is in office through November of 2020.
|
|
|
Post by MrPerfect on Sept 13, 2019 19:31:01 GMT -8
This is not SDSU problem since it wasn't part of the measure G initiative.
|
|
|
Post by junior on Sept 13, 2019 19:38:45 GMT -8
Of course it isn't. But that bridge has allegedly been in the planning stages for over 30 years, and the area that bridge would REALLY help is the Fenton Marketplace, and I don't recall any great push for that bridge back when Fenton Marketplace was built. I don't see how Squirmin' Scott Sherman can claim that SDSU would stand to gain the most from that bridge. Isn't Turd Shermans time about up? I still think that retiredaztec and Turd Sherman are the same people. Just spit out my damn beer on the screen. LMFAO
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Sept 13, 2019 21:10:29 GMT -8
This is not SDSU problem since it wasn't part of the measure G initiative. It wasn't part of the Soccer City "plan" either.
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Sept 14, 2019 10:34:06 GMT -8
It isn't unusual for governments to ask for capital improvements, especially for traffic, when looking at new development. Of course it isn't. But that bridge has allegedly been in the planning stages for over 30 years, and the area that bridge would REALLY help is the Fenton Marketplace, and I don't recall any great push for that bridge back when Fenton Marketplace was built. I don't see how Squirmin' Scott Sherman can claim that SDSU would stand to gain the most from that bridge. Again, it is quite common for governments to ask for infrastructure improvements for developments to be approved, especially large ones. The developers of Fanita ranch in Santee are being asked to fund some $30-40M in improvements to Highway 52 which would include widening bridges even though that highway was originally designed with future expansion in mind. The Fenton Parkway bridge would benefit the entire area, including the SDSU West development, though I don't believe SDSU should be held to cover the entire cost. Our problem is that we are the next big development in the area. I expect that when Riverwalk GC is finally developed they will be asked to make improvements to roadways because the propensity of local roads to flood during periods of significant rainfall.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Sept 14, 2019 13:20:51 GMT -8
Of course it isn't. But that bridge has allegedly been in the planning stages for over 30 years, and the area that bridge would REALLY help is the Fenton Marketplace, and I don't recall any great push for that bridge back when Fenton Marketplace was built. I don't see how Squirmin' Scott Sherman can claim that SDSU would stand to gain the most from that bridge. Again, it is quite common for governments to ask for infrastructure improvements for developments to be approved, especially large ones. The developers of Fanita ranch in Santee are being asked to fund some $30-40M in improvements to Highway 52 which would include widening bridges even though that highway was originally designed with future expansion in mind. The Fenton Parkway bridge would benefit the entire area, including the SDSU West development, though I don't believe SDSU should be held to cover the entire cost. Our problem is that we are the next big development in the area. I expect that when Riverwalk GC is finally developed they will be asked to make improvements to roadways because the propensity of local roads to flood during periods of significant rainfall. I had some involvement with the city and the Chargers on an earlier attempt to build a new stadium (perhaps 2005-'6), and there were discussions requiring the Chargers---and their development partner--to build a new freeway ramp out of the project, directly onto either I-15 or I-8. So it was going to be even more expensive.
|
|