|
Post by azteccc on Oct 5, 2012 18:10:32 GMT -8
I think the roomers were a good thing, the hype had plateaued. Just curious. Am I correct that you and retiredaztec are the only holdouts on leaving the Molehill West being a mistake? i don't know what others think... RB is with it somewhat, maybe? -- I wouldn't call it a mistake. I just am simply shocked sometimes at the shortsightedness (which is also thrown my way) and blind optimism of 80% of the people on here. I still admit my main concern (like, 95%) is Aztec basketball. Call me a "worse" fan if you want, don't care. I have supported and still do support both teams and the entire athletic dept, it's just that my passion when it comes to any sport is sdsu basketball. I understand the money, which we still have no idea about. But i also understand that NO, it was not a necessity, no matter how much any of you want to make it out to be. Our athletics would have been JUST FINE in the MW. Practice facility and new football coach money? No. But fine. And it is hard for you or anyone else to argue, with a straight face, the detriment to our basketball team. Sure, you can argue upsides, but the downsides FARRRRRRRRRR outweigh any and all of those. Yes, I still find it s#!++y that we threw our national program under the bus for our football program that gives up 40 to north dakota, just to get them into a new version of the MW.
|
|
|
Post by rockshow on Oct 5, 2012 18:29:41 GMT -8
Just curious. Am I correct that you and retiredaztec are the only holdouts on leaving the Molehill West being a mistake? i don't know what others think... RB is with it somewhat, maybe? -- I wouldn't call it a mistake. I just am simply shocked sometimes at the shortsightedness (which is also thrown my way) and blind optimism of 80% of the people on here. I still admit my main concern (like, 95%) is Aztec basketball. Call me a "worse" fan if you want, don't care. I have supported and still do support both teams and the entire athletic dept, it's just that my passion when it comes to any sport is sdsu basketball. I understand the money, which we still have no idea about. But i also understand that NO, it was not a necessity, no matter how much any of you want to make it out to be. Our athletics would have been JUST FINE in the MW. Practice facility and new football coach money? No. But fine. And it is hard for you or anyone else to argue, with a straight face, the detriment to our basketball team. Sure, you can argue upsides, but the downsides FARRRRRRRRRR outweigh any and all of those. Yes, I still find it s#!++y that we threw our national program under the bus for our football program that gives up 40 to north dakota, just to get them into a new version of the MW. We didn't make the decision for the sake of our football team, we did it for the revenue we will generate from our football team being in the Big East and to maintain it's viability in the ongoing conference musical chairs. That money will benefit all our programs. With the news of upcoming tv revenue, tv coverage for all our sports teams, incoming recruits and potential ones as well, new members to big west and increased anticipated efforts by old members.. The move is becoming harder and harder to dislike. Not to mention the Big West is superior to the mountain west in many other of the sports we compete in. In hindsight, I think athletics makes this move 1000 out of 1000 times. The fact that we are virtually guaranteed to have great success our first 2 years in the big west at least will only improve our sustainability and outside perception of our team in the long run.
|
|
|
Post by MontezumaPhil on Oct 5, 2012 18:53:39 GMT -8
Just curious. Am I correct that you and retiredaztec are the only holdouts on leaving the Molehill West being a mistake? i don't know what others think... RB is with it somewhat, maybe? -- I wouldn't call it a mistake. I just am simply shocked sometimes at the shortsightedness (which is also thrown my way) and blind optimism of 80% of the people on here. I still admit my main concern (like, 95%) is Aztec basketball. Call me a "worse" fan if you want, don't care. I have supported and still do support both teams and the entire athletic dept, it's just that my passion when it comes to any sport is sdsu basketball. I understand the money, which we still have no idea about. But i also understand that NO, it was not a necessity, no matter how much any of you want to make it out to be. Our athletics would have been JUST FINE in the MW. Practice facility and new football coach money? No. But fine. And it is hard for you or anyone else to argue, with a straight face, the detriment to our basketball team. Sure, you can argue upsides, but the downsides FARRRRRRRRRR outweigh any and all of those. Yes, I still find it s#!++y that we threw our national program under the bus for our football program that gives up 40 to north dakota, just to get them into a new version of the MW. You do stick to your guns, azteccc. I'll give you that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2012 20:55:20 GMT -8
Mr. Triple C, if you notice, I continually refer to our new non-football conference as the Big Lots. Perhaps you might infer from that I'm not exactly impressed with going there. However, going there as well as the Big East is the far lesser evil than remaining in a slowly but surely dying Molehill West.
|
|
|
Post by Trujillos & Beer on Oct 5, 2012 21:50:22 GMT -8
Just curious. Am I correct that you and retiredaztec are the only holdouts on leaving the Molehill West being a mistake? Our athletics would have been JUST FINE in the MW. Practice facility and new football coach money? No. But fine. No, they wouldn't. Even if it was possible to stay afloat for a bit, without added revenue SDSU football could never survive long term. Maybe not even short term given the budget problems. The MWC only accepts football members and has never given any indication of changing that stance. One way or another eventually SDSU hoops was going to leave the MWC and the only landing spot is the BW. You can have it on SDSU's terms with an increase in revenue or you can have it on the MWC's terms with nothing. Or I suppose you could hope the MWC would feel pity when SDSU closes it's football program and allows all other sports to remain. Good luck with that. ..Sent from my Samsung GS3..
|
|
|
Post by TheSanDiegan on Oct 5, 2012 21:54:28 GMT -8
Just curious. Am I correct that you and retiredaztec are the only holdouts on leaving the Molehill West being a mistake? i don't know what others think... RB is with it somewhat, maybe? -- I wouldn't call it a mistake. I just am simply shocked sometimes at the shortsightedness (which is also thrown my way) and blind optimism of 80% of the people on here. I still admit my main concern (like, 95%) is Aztec basketball. Call me a "worse" fan if you want, don't care. I have supported and still do support both teams and the entire athletic dept, it's just that my passion when it comes to any sport is sdsu basketball. I understand the money, which we still have no idea about. But i also understand that NO, it was not a necessity, no matter how much any of you want to make it out to be. Our athletics would have been JUST FINE in the MW. Practice facility and new football coach money? No. But fine. And it is hard for you or anyone else to argue, with a straight face, the detriment to our basketball team. Sure, you can argue upsides, but the downsides FARRRRRRRRRR outweigh any and all of those. Yes, I still find it s#!++y that we threw our national program under the bus for our football program that gives up 40 to north dakota, just to get them into a new version of the MW. I can't say I really disagree with anything in your post... However, I find it rather pointless to crib about it. It is what it is. I do think we can (and will) succeed pursuing a Gonzaga model and a big-fish-in-small-pond approach. If we become regulars in the Sweet 16, no one is going to be bitchin' about playing in Big Lots. I also think the move will be to the benefit of our exposure. Already we're hearing there will be twelve SDSU games on FSN next season, ensuring - at a minimum - regional coverage from NoCal to the border and from Vegas to Hawaii, with ESPN national broadcast rights forthcoming. I think at a minimum we'll be seeing ourselves on ESPN at least as many time as we will this year (four). Four home-and-homes against the BE and the money to book quality OOC games throughout the season ensures quality content. Lastly, I for one am STOKED we won't be flying to play more than one game that requires three plane changes to reach base camp en route to some remote mountain village accessible only with sherpas. I'll miss the Pit and our Vegas timeshare, but I won't really miss that vertigo $#!+ on the court in Ft. Collins or our soujourns to the frozen tundra in Laramie. Hell, half our conference games will still be played in the best venue in the Molehill anyway...
|
|
|
Post by manicwater on Oct 5, 2012 22:54:21 GMT -8
Still an embarrassment with the ancillary events being canceled. Why to the schools? The problem was with the promoter. And who hired the promoter? Of course the heat comes back on the host school.
|
|
|
Post by azteccc on Oct 5, 2012 23:08:57 GMT -8
^^^ you can argue positives from seven different angles. all have their merits.
i didn't post that just for f's sake, sgf asked if there were only two of us. i dont really even want to have this conversation again, because many on here get unusually heated about it. but i think there are MANY in the "wtf did we do" camp, and far more who have serious reservations but are going w/ the flow.
i am not worried about football. worst case, we stink it up like we have for decades, but make wayyyyy more money in doing so. absolute best case, we get into an *almost* nationally relevant bowl.
i am not worried about soccer, or baseball, or volleyball, because the big west is just fine for them. and lets all be real here, those sports dont really matter to many people.
i AM worried about basketball. college bball is my ish. i'll take aztec bball over any nfl, nba, epl, nhl, mlb, or lfl team any day of the week. and anyone who knows college basketball, knows that we are taking three steps back. can we take those three steps forward again? maybe, who knows. but damn it sucks to waste 6 years of progress with nothing more than a "hold on for dear life" attitude by fans and the administration. as of now, we're making sweet 16(s)(yea, count this year) and getting our best recruits ever and have a SOLD OUT season, and we are putting that in jeopardy.
no one can deny we are putting that in jeopardy. i'll trade our unbuilt practice facility and memphis games for what we have now any day of the week. so would fish.
|
|
|
Post by azteccc on Oct 5, 2012 23:15:23 GMT -8
Our athletics would have been JUST FINE in the MW. Practice facility and new football coach money? No. But fine. No, they wouldn't. Even if it was possible to stay afloat for a bit, without added revenue SDSU football could never survive long term. Maybe not even short term given the budget problems. and as i've said, we can argue the economics and financial implications of the move all day. if you think this is true, please explain: 1. our budget surplus this year 2. assurances you have that our budget will decrease 3. lost $ if bball revenue drops (which, when comparing opponents w/ revenue, you'll have a hard time doing) not to mention a host of other things that would actually conclude an analysis of the complete financial implications of the move. i've already conceded that we'll make more money, but if you were hired for this job and concluded our athletics would die without the move (especially when you dont even know the $ we'll get), you'd be laughed at then fired.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2012 2:15:42 GMT -8
Everyone that refers to our current or future conferences by nicknames meant to demean them are dumb.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2012 6:59:02 GMT -8
No, they wouldn't. Even if it was possible to stay afloat for a bit, without added revenue SDSU football could never survive long term. Maybe not even short term given the budget problems. and as i've said, we can argue the economics and financial implications of the move all day. if you think this is true, please explain: 1. our budget surplus this year 2. assurances you have that our budget will decrease 3. lost $ if bball revenue drops (which, when comparing opponents w/ revenue, you'll have a hard time doing) not to mention a host of other things that would actually conclude an analysis of the complete financial implications of the move. i've already conceded that we'll make more money, but if you were hired for this job and concluded our athletics would die without the move (especially when you dont even know the $ we'll get), you'd be laughed at then fired. Question for you... Do you know what total revenue was for the entire athletic department last year? (Less importantly... do you know what the break down was for that total? Football? Hoops? Other sports? Subsidies?)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2012 8:19:24 GMT -8
^^^ you can argue positives from seven different angles. all have their merits. i didn't post that just for f's sake, sgf asked if there were only two of us. i dont really even want to have this conversation again, because many on here get unusually heated about it. but i think there are MANY in the "wtf did we do" camp, and far more who have serious reservations but are going w/ the flow. My intent was to get you to name others in the WTF did we do camp as you refer to it. However, you haven't been able to since there simply are just two of you. I think the majority of us have "reservations" but they aren't "serious." You highly overrate the MWC. It was a good conference for a brief period after TCU joined and Utah hired Urban Meyer. That would be from 2005 onward. However, it started going downhill once Utah left, then lost a lot more after BYU and TCU left. And Boise was gone whether we went with them to the BE or somebody else did. And make no mistake, had SDSU not jumped at the opportunity, the BE would have asked Fresno or even UNLV just to get Boise. And I don't give a damn what UNLV's doofus AD says, UNLV would have split their sports up and left. Hell, they need that additional $5-$7M per year even worse than we do.
|
|
|
Post by iambballanalyst on Oct 6, 2012 8:20:31 GMT -8
We're going to put on a 3 point shooting clinic. I just hope it's not windy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2012 8:24:09 GMT -8
Everyone that refers to our current or future conferences by nicknames meant to demean them are dumb. Calling our future basketball conference the immense misnomer that is The Big West is dumb.
|
|
|
Post by Azthetic on Oct 6, 2012 8:40:29 GMT -8
Everyone that refers to our current or future conferences by nicknames meant to demean them are dumb. Calling our future basketball conference the immense misnomer that is The Big West is dumb. I may have done it a few times, but I've never been a big fan of making up funny names to call-out teams, conferences, etc. In my opinion, name calling immediately lowers the value of one's argument. It is sometimes necessary to make a point, but not every time.
|
|
|
Post by Azthetic on Oct 6, 2012 8:41:33 GMT -8
Back on topic. I think that this game is going to be insane for everyone associated with it. Stoked that it is back on....or never left.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2012 8:44:21 GMT -8
Calling our future basketball conference the immense misnomer that is The Big West is dumb. I may have done it a few times, but I've never been a big fan of making up funny names to call-out teams, conferences, etc. In my opinion, name calling immediately lowers the value of one's argument. It is sometimes necessary to make a point, but not every time. Maybe I could start referring to the conference by its acronym but I feel absolutely foolish calling it the BIG West. If anybody can think of a more inappropriate name for a conference, let me know.
|
|
|
Post by Trujillos & Beer on Oct 6, 2012 8:54:18 GMT -8
No, they wouldn't. Even if it was possible to stay afloat for a bit, without added revenue SDSU football could never survive long term. Maybe not even short term given the budget problems. and as i've said, we can argue the economics and financial implications of the move all day. if you think this is true, please explain: 1. our budget surplus this year 2. assurances you have that our budget will decrease 3. lost $ if bball revenue drops (which, when comparing opponents w/ revenue, you'll have a hard time doing) not to mention a host of other things that would actually conclude an analysis of the complete financial implications of the move. i've already conceded that we'll make more money, but if you were hired for this job and concluded our athletics would die without the move (especially when you dont even know the $ we'll get), you'd be laughed at then fired. I don't know what the TV revenue will be in the BE. I also don't know what the cut to SDSU's budget will be from the state. That said it would be reasonable to assume that both will be significant given the consultants who advised SDSU on the potential TV deal and what's happened with education cuts recently. Not being able to predict the future with 100% certainty doesn't mean you can't see what's likely to come. Assuming things won't change will get you fired quicker than assuming they won't. So sure, it's possible that football would survive in the MWC which would allow hoops to say there. Maybe the state funds would remain the same and the athletic department could operate at a surplus. You might even be able to afford quality coaches under market value when Fish retires. It's possible ticket prices could be increased without impacting sales to help make up for the loss of The Mtn. tv renenue (which already wipes out that $300K surplus you referenced). Things could be OK if most breaks went SDSU's way. Some people thought four years ago was a great time to buy a house. Most of them probably wish they would have been a little more forward thinking.
|
|
|
Post by TheSanDiegan on Oct 6, 2012 13:13:33 GMT -8
Calling our future basketball conference the immense misnomer that is The Big West is dumb. I may have done it a few times, but I've never been a big fan of making up funny names to call-out teams, conferences, etc. In my opinion, name calling immediately lowers the value of one's argument. It is sometimes necessary to make a point, but not every time. I guess I never got the memo that said we were all to act collectively butthurt whenever we have a little literary fun with our present and future conferences and their respective teams. And FWIW, I like to include a healthy side serving of facts to qualify my Rubles/New Mexico/Molehill blasts. As far as Big Lots goes? It's our new home, and not only do I (personally) use it as a term of endearment, but all things considered, it would take some pretty damn thin skin to take offense to it. Nonetheless, please feel free to liberally sprinkle these through any future post containing the words, "Ruble," "Rubes," "Weebles," "New Mexico," "Hobos," "Molehill," "Zoobs," "Big Lots," or any combination thereof: ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png)
|
|
|
Post by aztecemp on Oct 6, 2012 20:34:45 GMT -8
Just wanted to let you guys know that while watching tonight's preseason game for my Clippers on FSSD, they ran a few commercials for the Battle on the Midway.
|
|