|
|
Post by laaztec on Jun 14, 2010 16:41:50 GMT -8
I think the Super Conference (16 schools) will ultimately happen but until then I think it buys SDSU time to improve it's football program to get to be a desirable program to add. If (and it's a big if) SDSU can get to the level of Utah, TCU, Boise and BYU then SDSU might by some miracle get into the PAC 16. Just trying to see the positive side of Utah going to the PAC 12.  |
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Jun 14, 2010 16:49:21 GMT -8
SDSU is never going to be in the PAC 16. State could go 12-0 for five years and no invite will be forth coming.
But I have been wrong, just like when I called the end of PAC 10 threads.
|
|
|
|
Post by laaztec on Jun 14, 2010 16:51:36 GMT -8
SDSU is never going to be in the PAC 16. State could go 12-0 for five years and no invite will be forth coming. But I have been wrong, just like when I called the end of PAC 10 threads. Keep hope alive! Even though I happy we are in the MWC you have to strive for the PAC 12 12-0 for the next 5 years would give us at least 4 BC$ wins. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jun 14, 2010 16:52:07 GMT -8
I think the Super Conference (16 schools) will ultimately happen but until then I think it buys SDSU time to improve it's football program to get to be a desirable program to add. If (and it's a big if) SDSU can get to the level of Utah, TCU, Boise and BYU then SDSU might by some miracle get into the PAC 16. Just trying to see the positive side of Utah going to the PAC 12. Hey, laaztec, get ready to be flamed! They are warming up the toaster ovens to blister your backside. What's the matter with you, thinking that SDSU has even a 1% chance to enter the Pac-10! ! ! !  But, you know what, it makes more sense to build at least a theoretical scenario in which the Aztecs get to whack the Bruins every year than sob and roll into a ball on the floor! I think the chances are very slim that the Aztecs can pull it off, but if we can't at least imagine nirvana we will never get there! As you say, while the cement has not yet dried, let's get the football team back on track. Remember 1979? Supposedly a bad year, mostly because of that awful beating by BYU that filled the TV screens. And yet, in that long ago 8 win season we beat Wisconsin. Arizona, and Miami of Florida. Ya gotta believe! AzWm |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2010 17:02:17 GMT -8
I hadn't read this thread when I started my own, but as others will see, I completely agree with L.A. on this.
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jun 14, 2010 17:06:00 GMT -8
Full_Monty, you may remember the early '60s when we were playing teams such as Pepperdine, Redlands, and U.S.I.U. If someone had told us that we would someday be playing, and sometimes beating, schools such as Utah, BYU, Air Force, Iowa State, Wisconsin, Stanford, Cal, and Oregon State, we would have laughed. No, not laughed. . . we would have quietly sent for the men in white suits to deal with the poor fellow.
If SDSU can resurrect this program, reach the 8-10 wins a season level and 40,000-45.000 average attendance, and continue elevating the scholastic profile of the school, well in that case we might be an attractive alternative to the likes of Texas A&M, Houston, or Kansas.
At some point the forces influencing the Pac-10 might be strong enough to overcome UCLA's and USC's desire not to make the Aztecs a serious competitor for San Diego area recruits.
It's not a probability, but why throw in the towel without a fight?
AzWm
|
|
|
|
Post by Deja Vu U Monty on Jun 14, 2010 17:58:18 GMT -8
SDSU could sell out every game. SDSU could add medical and dental schools. SDSU could have the Haliburton International Research Center. SDSU could go undefeated for the next 5 years like those above say. There will be no Pac-Howevermany invitation. Ever. So get over it and let's hope that we can swing our own BCS auto invite and then we can thumb our noses at the Pac-Losers.
|
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jun 14, 2010 18:08:37 GMT -8
I think the Super Conference (16 schools) will ultimately happen but until then I think it buys SDSU time to improve it's football program to get to be a desirable program to add. If (and it's a big if) SDSU can get to the level of Utah, TCU, Boise and BYU then SDSU might by some miracle get into the PAC 16. Just trying to see the positive side of Utah going to the PAC 12. Winning is not the only factor in the equation. Our academic image absolutely must improve. College presidents are eggheads who, while realizing the financial importance of athletics, do not want their schools' academic reputations tainted by association. These schools' alumni don't want that any more than the presidents do. SDSU is an excellent school but this whole "party school" thing has got to end yesterday. It also doesn't help for our own alumni (ahem, Chris Ello) to be mocking State's academics. It really makes us look bad. Our academic profile cannot change unless the master plan changes. Utah and Colorado are top 100 world universities, we are a top 400; we will never be able to reach that level until we are allowed to pursue professional schools, grant PhDs (as well as other professional doctorates) both in many other disciplines and solo. SDSU sent out a message that they are adding 2 more PhDs in Evolutionary Bio and some other hard science with UCR and UCSD, but we still only offer something like 18 PhDs. When SDSU announced that they will likely total 150 million dollars in research, there was a negative quote from some state official that SDSU must make sure it doesn't stray from being a teaching college. We face a battle that we can't win because the shortsighted state is pulled both by the UCs' desire to maintain dominance, and the rest of the CSU system's desire not to allow breakaways. Instead of adding another major world university to UC, UCLA, UCSD, they would rather assure that UCR retains some dominance and UCI develops. It really brings it home when other states' legislatures and government agencies show concern over the future of their large universities and even their private ones, and the state of California places handcuffs on what could be 5 instead of 4 dominant world universities. San Diego State needs to find a way to be either given the title as Flagship by the state and granted the ability to pursue professional schools, PhDs, PsyDs, etc solo or as say a 1:1 ratio with dual sponsored programs; a different designation as a school between the CSU teacher model and the UC graduate/professional/research model; or, a designation as UC campus - otherwise, SDSU's academic profile will grow, slightly and instead of being a top 400 world university, and a top 130 USA instiution, it might get into the 200s and 90s, but never more than that. It is wrong to think winning would have solved this matter, it is also wrong to consider that our academic profile is poor - it is in the middle. We need to win and win big, but we also need our university to find a way to receive a new designation as just as Utah grew past the MWC, SDSU has grown past the California State University System. |
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Jun 14, 2010 18:13:47 GMT -8
I was going to start a similar thread so it looks like you, SGF and I think alike.
This should be Dr. Weber and Sterks wake up call. You better position SDSU to be as attractive as possible when the real 16 team league goes down. No more going on the cheap with coaches and we need to get vocal about a stadium solution.
As crazy as it may sound, with a 16 team scenario looming we ARE a great option...we just need to be ready and not F it up. SDSU is on the clock...
|
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Jun 14, 2010 18:16:26 GMT -8
Also, isn't funny that until about 6 months ago there were people who thought the Pac 10 would never expand. Things change.
|
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jun 14, 2010 18:22:54 GMT -8
I was going to start a similar thread so it looks like you, SGF and I think alike. This should be Dr. Weber and Sterks wake up call. You better position SDSU to be as attractive as possible when the real 16 team league goes down. No more going on the cheap with coaches and we need to get vocal about a stadium solution. As crazy as it may sound, with a 16 team scenario looming we ARE a great option...we just need to be ready and not F it up. SDSU is on the clock... What can they do if the money isn't there? Weber spent the last half to 3/4 of the last decade siphoning money from student fees to keep the program even afloat. The shocking lack of fund raising has to change and that is now Sterk's role. But it boils down to the alumni and the community that have failed this program both in seats purchased and fund raising. |
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Jun 14, 2010 18:29:16 GMT -8
A stadium is a must and there is no way that is happening without some serious money. It is a necessity if we want to make the cut the next go round. The University of Houston isn't stupid and announced their new football stadium and basketball remodel about 5 days ago and I don't think its a coincedence that people thought college footballs version of armageddon was about to take place. They wanted to show any potential conferences that they are taking football seriously and would be a great choice.
They can also continuing hiring coaches like Hoke and Burns rather than Juco's and Nice Guys. That ish set us back 7 freakin' years.
Start prepping like SDSU's football future is on the line.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fred Noonan on Jun 14, 2010 18:49:05 GMT -8
I concur that the PacWhatever will never allow SDSU in. I am not going to waste my time and yours reciting all the phony reasons advanced by them and their shills. Inviting Coloado--for crying out loud--and Utah puts the lie to all the TV market and academic BS. They do not want recruiting competition and view us as a part of LA. I for one resent their arrogance and so should every other SDSU grad. I resent the efforts to demean my degree and exclude my city from what would be a natural California rivalry. So, having ranted let me again say I will not repeat their belittling arguments, I will simply observe it will be a cold day in hell when we get in the PacWhatever. The Cubbies will have won four World Series by then. The Fred Noonan School of Navigation.  |
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jun 14, 2010 18:51:08 GMT -8
The newest building on campus, the Arts and Letters Building, cost 25 million a stadium likely 5-8 times that. I think we might be at a guns or butter, either/or, sophie's choice here. Can we justify building something that will be used 10 times a year over 5 or 6 buildings on campus? I'm getting to the point that our best option is downtown as a beggar to the chargers and spending 200 million building-up the school on the qualcolm lot. Chasing a football pipe dream might not be worth it in the long run.
|
|
|
|
Post by laaztec on Jun 14, 2010 18:54:25 GMT -8
An on campus stadium will be used more than 10 times a year.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2010 18:56:08 GMT -8
Don't want to be the downer here but IMO, we're screwed. Texas and co. not going to the PAC is the worst possible outcome for us. Utah WILL go to the PAC and BYU/TCU WILL go to the B12 to get them back to championship game numbers. Since the money with the new TV deal has yet to be determined beyond the fact the UT gets the biggest piece, additional monies will be found by the ESPN kingmakers to bribe two more programs to sign on.
Say goodbye to SDSU football within 5 years. Say goodbye to Hoke. He'll be on the next train out of town.
|
|
|
|
Post by laaztec on Jun 14, 2010 18:57:37 GMT -8
Don't want to be the downer here but IMO, we're screwed. Texas and co. not going to the PAC is the worst possible outcome for us. Utah WILL go to the PAC and BYU/TCU WILL go to the B12 to get them back to championship game numbers. The Big 12 is going to stay at 10 and petition the NCAA to waive the 12 team championship game rule. Texas isn't going to share the money they just got with 2 other schools. |
|
|
|
Post by boblowe on Jun 14, 2010 19:06:07 GMT -8
The newest building on campus, the Arts and Letters Building, cost 25 million a stadium likely 5-8 times that. I think we might be at a guns or butter, either/or, sophie's choice here. Can we justify building something that will be used 10 times a year over 5 or 6 buildings on campus? I'm getting to the point that our best option is downtown as a beggar to the chargers and spending 200 million building-up the school on the qualcolm lot. Chasing a football pipe dream might not be worth it in the long run. What about a 35K stadium shared with an MLS team that will be use a LOT more than that. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Jun 14, 2010 19:07:07 GMT -8
I think the Super Conference (16 schools) will ultimately happen but until then I think it buys SDSU time to improve it's football program to get to be a desirable program to add. If (and it's a big if) SDSU can get to the level of Utah, TCU, Boise and BYU then SDSU might by some miracle get into the PAC 16. Just trying to see the positive side of Utah going to the PAC 12. Winning is not the only factor in the equation. Our academic image absolutely must improve. Oh, for Christ's sake, John. Cal, UCSmellA and Stanford all look down their noses at UCSD. Do you really believe that SDSU, no matter how enhanced our academic reputation could possibly become, will measure up in their arrogant eyes? Hell, UCSB, one of the best known "party schools" in the country and, quite frankly, one of the most overrated UC system schools, loves to chant "STATE SCHOOL" when we play them. You can worry all you want about our academic reputation, but in no way, shape or form does it rely upon any UC school recognizing us because they never will. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Jun 14, 2010 19:12:19 GMT -8
Full_Monty, you may remember the early '60s when we were playing teams such as Pepperdine, Redlands, and U.S.I.U. AzWm Not to pick nits, but there was no USIU in the '60s. It was Cal Western, I believe, before a certain A-Hole president by the name of William Rust changed it after driving out every prof he found to be left of Hitler and changed the name to USIU. =Bob |
|
