|
Post by sleepy on Oct 4, 2012 9:19:51 GMT -8
I think we're running on something like 33 out of the past 35 seasons why what you typed there just ain't so. So, the stadium is why we've lost? Maybe it's the black uniforms, or playing at night, or being named Aztecs, or not having Zuma, or playing in San Diego, or not being called CSU, San Diego Facilities, of which a football stadium is huge part -- a BIG, HUGE, ENORMOUS part -- of the equation in a year in, year out successful football program, are everything. Besides, The Q is an awful fan experience. If I'm sitting on a 20 yard line seat there, even at field level, it's the equivalent of watching the game from the parking lot in many, many stadiums. When the wrecking ball is taken to it, it will be the dawn of a new era in SDSU football -- one that sends us on a much more positive trajectory. It is the same debate as the San Diego Sports Arena versus Viejas Arena. You can say, "Sure. Just have the team win more down by the airport and people will come." But... Come on. Who are we kidding? The construction of Viejas on-campus was the sugar that has attracted everything -- and everyone -- since. I'm sure The Q was state-of-the-art NFL caliber when Nixon was in his first term, but so was the electric typewriter. Know any top-of-the-line football recruits breaking out correction tape these days on their term papers??
|
|
|
Post by monty on Oct 4, 2012 9:36:23 GMT -8
well, it is a pipe dream to expect an on campus stadium any time soon, so we better figure out how to win at the Q
|
|
|
Post by matteosandiego on Oct 4, 2012 9:58:16 GMT -8
I guess some people just see problems, while others focus on the solutions. I don't see why it is a pipe dream to expect SDSU to take its own future into their hands and create something new and profitable. Sure beats the lame duck attitude of just riding the Chargers coattails to places that aren't best for the University. well, it is a pipe dream to expect an on campus stadium any time soon, so we better figure out how to win at the Q
|
|
|
Post by monty on Oct 4, 2012 10:34:30 GMT -8
money, location, we're not going to do anything until the chargers get off the pot (they and their fan base would spin that as SDSU putting the Chargers in a position where they have no future in SD and they lighting bolt to LA) etc. Seeing Qualcolm as some magical albatross that has actively been strangling us is just seeing problems, not seeing how at best far away an on campus stadium is and at worst that it isn't feasible at all with what we have to work with.
We're one of 3 programs in Socal, the Q is now connected by trolley to SDSU, there is a massive parking lot for tailgaiting, there are tons of hotels nearby and connected by trolley to the stadium, etc. There is no reason we can't be competitive at the Q. It would be great if we built something on campus and it very well might be a panacea particularly with the right staff and players and increased fanbase on the way there, but, at the earliest how long could you see it happening, half a dozen years? That's a lot of time to try to figure out how to win 2 trolley stops from campus'
I was a student in the early days of Fish, the students and community didn't just start turning out in droves, it was a steady build from 3/4k average to 7/8k average to now sell outs and that's because of winning. Fish doesn't come to the Pete, but Fish + Viejas + banners has equaled sellouts, not just being on campus.
In short, we damn well better figure out how to win at the Q because we aren't opening up an on campus stadium anytime soon
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Oct 4, 2012 10:53:40 GMT -8
money, location, we're not going to do anything until the chargers get off the pot (they and their fan base would spin that as SDSU putting the Chargers in a position where they have no future in SD and they lighting bolt to LA) etc. Seeing Qualcolm as some magical albatross that has actively been strangling us is just seeing problems, not seeing how at best far away an on campus stadium is and at worst that it isn't feasible at all with what we have to work with. We're one of 3 programs in Socal, the Q is now connected by trolley to SDSU, there is a massive parking lot for tailgaiting, there are tons of hotels nearby and connected by trolley to the stadium, etc. There is no reason we can't be competitive at the Q. It would be great if we built something on campus and it very well might be a panacea particularly with the right staff and players and increased fanbase on the way there, but, at the earliest how long could you see it happening, half a dozen years? That's a lot of time to try to figure out how to win 2 trolley stops from campus' I was a student in the early days of Fish, the students and community didn't just start turning out in droves, it was a steady build from 3/4k average to 7/8k average to now sell outs and that's because of winning. Fish doesn't come to the Pete, but Fish + Viejas + banners has equaled sellouts, not just being on campus. In short, we damn well better figure out how to win at the Q because we aren't opening up an on campus stadium anytime soon You summarized the path forward very well. The Padres got a new park AFTER they'd shown success (though we were baited by Moores).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2012 11:50:28 GMT -8
money, location, we're not going to do anything until the chargers get off the pot (they and their fan base would spin that as SDSU putting the Chargers in a position where they have no future in SD and they lighting bolt to LA) etc. Seeing Qualcolm as some magical albatross that has actively been strangling us is just seeing problems, not seeing how at best far away an on campus stadium is and at worst that it isn't feasible at all with what we have to work with. For reasons already articulated above, SDSU will never achieve its full football potential as long as we're stuck in Qualcomm. That's not an excuse for not winning a lot more games than we have, but it is absolutely a reason for having a much lower ceiling for success than we should have. As to the Chargers, there was a guy with an Antonio Gates jersey ahead of me at Starbucks on Sunday morning. I joked that he could see them often after they move here to L.A. He said he's a San Diegan who was visiting friends for the weekend and always wears his jersey on game days. He also commented that although a stadium will never be built in SD for the Spanoses that he expected them to give up and sell the team within the next few years. Anybody else agree with that?
|
|
|
Post by insider on Oct 4, 2012 11:53:35 GMT -8
I think it is unlikely Chargers move anytime soon.
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Oct 4, 2012 12:28:08 GMT -8
The UNLV stadium will never get built. I believe that UNLV's stadium or a version of it will get built. Nevada is NOT California and has nowhere near the anti-development mentality in its citizenry or the legislature. This school is Nevada's "prize" and "pride and joy" AND its in Las Vegas. There IS money available and they WILL use it. I'll believe it when I see them make the ceremonial shovel dig. Nuff said.
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Oct 4, 2012 13:04:59 GMT -8
Steve Fisher doesn't take the SDSU job without Cox/Viejas arena. The hoops team didn't earn the arena with their solid play either yet it was built. Between then and now we've gone from one of the worst basketball teams in the nation to one of the best.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Oct 4, 2012 14:09:19 GMT -8
Need the coach and the stadium..
As for now nothing has even graced a CSU desk about stadium funding requests. So unless they have an angel donor then this is a long way off...
|
|
|
Post by Ozomahtli on Oct 4, 2012 19:01:45 GMT -8
For reasons already articulated above, SDSU will never achieve its full football potential as long as we're stuck in Qualcomm. That's not an excuse for not winning a lot more games than we have, but it is absolutely a reason for having a much lower ceiling for success than we should have.
|
|
|
Post by monty on Oct 4, 2012 21:37:38 GMT -8
I think it is unlikely Chargers move anytime soon. Agree. No one believes it when they say they aren't, but they aren't. The moment a stadium in LA becomes actually inevitable (and that day is when those crazy Dodger Owners buy AEG) they are gone. The Spanoi will likely sell for somewhere near what the worth of an LA team would be and we'll see what happens to the Q site.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2012 5:56:48 GMT -8
he Q is a dump.
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Oct 5, 2012 7:07:23 GMT -8
We need an on campus stadium, just like USC and UCLA. No wonder we can not compete for recruits. Thieir on campus stadiums are so much better than having to go two miles to the Q.
Insert sarcasm smiley here.
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Oct 5, 2012 7:17:07 GMT -8
We need an on campus stadium, just like USC and UCLA. No wonder we can not compete for recruits. Thieir on campus stadiums are so much better than having to go two miles to the Q. Insert sarcasm smiley here. Interesting. UCLA is 20 miles from the Rose Bowl. The Rose Bowl is interesting that you park and tailgate on the golf course, but it doesn't have any collegiate feel. In any event, the Rose Bowl is certainly not the Q or Raymond James Stadium. It has an historical element that they get to play up. It makes due, but UCLA would do better if it had an on campus stadium. UCLA is somewhat nomadic as they used to share the Coliseum. SC, C'mon. maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF-8&q=google+map+la+coliseum&fb=1&gl=us&hq=google+map+la+coliseum&hnear=google+map+la+coliseum&cid=0,0,10779184606615785492&ei=pvhuUM_9A4nD2QWF34GYDw&ved=0CGgQ_BIwAg The Coliseum is "on campus".
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Oct 5, 2012 7:20:37 GMT -8
Someone else already mentioned it, but the arena almost never sold out until we jumped onto the national scene. The arena didn't bring them, the winning did. Same with the stadium, when the football team brought excitement---whether with winning or players like Faulk AND opponents that mattered---the stadium filled. Even with the short time Hoke was here, the surge in attendance and the vibe was palpable. Now, it is nonexistent. Bring in another coach like that who can also recruit and connect with the fans and media and the stadium will fill. A new stadium on campus is a nice dream but remember this is a commuter school and only a tiny fraction of the students live on campus which is a dead zone on weekends.
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Oct 5, 2012 7:47:42 GMT -8
Someone else already mentioned it, but the arena almost never sold out until we jumped onto the national scene. The arena didn't bring them, the winning did. Same with the stadium, when the football team brought excitement---whether with winning or players like Faulk AND opponents that mattered---the stadium filled. Even with the short time Hoke was here, the surge in attendance and the vibe was palpable. Now, it is nonexistent. Bring in another coach like that who can also recruit and connect with the fans and media and the stadium will fill. A new stadium on campus is a nice dream but remember this is a commuter school and only a tiny fraction of the students live on campus which is a dead zone on weekends. Where to start.... 1. The stadium will not fill at the Q. It is a 70K behemoth that the Chargers can not fill. The Chargers themselves are now seeking a 55K stadium. But beyond that, you assume that all you need to do is add water shake and presto you have 70K people at the Q. That water is the coach and you need to recruit him. The first question that every coach has when they are interviewing for a job is what are your facilities what is your investment plan. Hoke asked about it and asked about a future stadium. All of the candidates asked that same question. So it is naive to think that Q is fine and dandy and does not hamper our ability to recruit a coach. Yes, we got Brady but we scooped him from Ball State. 2. We are a commuter school with a tiny fraction living on campus? BS, 15% of students reside in University Housing. That does not include all of the students that live in the private housing that surrounds the campus. More is being built and the percentage of students living within 2 miles of campus is ~50%. In addition, you must have never been to State on a Friday or Saturday night, there is plenty of action all around. To say dead zone is amazing.
|
|
|
Post by oneepstein on Oct 5, 2012 7:48:39 GMT -8
FWIW the UNLV stadium will get built and football has almost nothing to do with it. The only reason it was "defeated" in the legislature at the end of 2010 is because they tried to lump several competing projects in along with it.
Community support for the project is overwhelming and the legislature will act on it almost as soon as the session begins. Vegas is different than San Diego and if it was just about UNLV Football it likely would have a hard time passing.
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Oct 5, 2012 8:11:12 GMT -8
We need an on campus stadium, just like USC and UCLA. No wonder we can not compete for recruits. Thieir on campus stadiums are so much better than having to go two miles to the Q. Insert sarcasm smiley here. Interesting. UCLA is 20 miles from the Rose Bowl. The Rose Bowl is interesting that you park and tailgate on the golf course, but it doesn't have any collegiate feel. In any event, the Rose Bowl is certainly not the Q or Raymond James Stadium. It has an historical element that they get to play up. It makes due, but UCLA would do better if it had an on campus stadium. UCLA is somewhat nomadic as they used to share the Coliseum. SC, C'mon. maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF-8&q=google+map+la+coliseum&fb=1&gl=us&hq=google+map+la+coliseum&hnear=google+map+la+coliseum&cid=0,0,10779184606615785492&ei=pvhuUM_9A4nD2QWF34GYDw&ved=0CGgQ_BIwAg The Coliseum is "on campus". It is very close to USC. It is not on campus. They rent, just like us. Never been to the Coliseum. I don't what it is like. I have been to the Rose Bowl and the Q is better.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Oct 5, 2012 8:29:49 GMT -8
Someone else already mentioned it, but the arena almost never sold out until we jumped onto the national scene. The arena didn't bring them, the winning did. Same with the stadium, when the football team brought excitement---whether with winning or players like Faulk AND opponents that mattered---the stadium filled. Even with the short time Hoke was here, the surge in attendance and the vibe was palpable. Now, it is nonexistent. Bring in another coach like that who can also recruit and connect with the fans and media and the stadium will fill. A new stadium on campus is a nice dream but remember this is a commuter school and only a tiny fraction of the students live on campus which is a dead zone on weekends. Where to start.... 1. The stadium will not fill at the Q. It is a 70K behemoth that the Chargers can not fill. The Chargers themselves are now seeking a 55K stadium. But beyond that, you assume that all you need to do is add water shake and presto you have 70K people at the Q. That water is the coach and you need to recruit him. The first question that every coach has when they are interviewing for a job is what are your facilities what is your investment plan. Hoke asked about it and asked about a future stadium. All of the candidates asked that same question. So it is naive to think that Q is fine and dandy and does not hamper our ability to recruit a coach. Yes, we got Brady but we scooped him from Ball State. 2. We are a commuter school with a tiny fraction living on campus? BS, 15% of students reside in University Housing. That does not include all of the students that live in the private housing that surrounds the campus. More is being built and the percentage of students living within 2 miles of campus is ~50%. In addition, you must have never been to State on a Friday or Saturday night, there is plenty of action all around. To say dead zone is amazing. Perhaps I was unclear, or you intentionally distorted what I said. What does "fill" mean, in the context of such pathetic crowds we now have? Obviously, I was comparing to the days of Faulk, etc. when the crowd was great and loud and excited to cheer for a winner. We will be fine with the Q, especially since---as others have said---it would be at least 10 years before we'd ever see a new campus stadium Students on campus. Wow. I thought maybe 10% lived on and near campus, but SDSU's official information says 12%. Are you saying that's NOT a fraction of the 35,000 students AND an even smaller percentage of the 45,000 or 55,000-seat stadium on campus? THAT is why SDSU is referred to as a "commuter" school. Get it?
|
|