|
|
Post by northparkaztec on Sept 17, 2024 12:54:48 GMT -8
"You obviously haven't been paying attention." Truly amazing how people talk to each other on these sports forums. But no, I was referring to the scheduling agreement, designed to salvage their season, when the PAC2 became the PAC2. Ok so the new distribution system would be a benefit, so that is good. It's still $2.2M x 5 years or something in a rolling period. Again, the bigger question is if we're yet again helping them out, these are reasonable questions. Plus we lose millions from NCAA credits. IDK maybe Im missing the math here, but none of this makes sense on a pack of hopes coming from 2 who've already broke their word from a year ago. Is the auto-bid even guaranteed? The 14M or 16M we have in NCAA credits is divided 11 ways so those millions amount to about $1.5 plus, what, another $8 million from other members brings our total up to about $2.2M? Not exactly a windfall. Plus, in the new conference, post season money will be distributed in a manner that rewards those who earn them more than those who don't. The PAC2 never "broke their word" to us. Eight of the remaining nine were ready to sign the deal. It was UW who broke the faith. creating a domino effect with the others. You obviously haven't been paying attention. No, the auto-bid is not guaranteed but the PAC will be, by far, the strongest conference not in the P4 if they get whom they are targeting. |
|
|
|
Post by northparkaztec on Sept 17, 2024 12:58:04 GMT -8
Per Chat GPT: For just the last two tournaments for our games: Total Share Over 6 Years= 9 × 350,000 × 6 = $18,900,000USD
|
|
|
|
Post by northparkaztec on Sept 17, 2024 13:01:02 GMT -8
Makes sense as the damages perhaps wouldn't amount to this figure in a probable manner. AFA is looking to leave the MW join Navy and Army in the AAC That would be 5 schools leaving the MW IF the New PAC added some additional schools from the MW could exit fees be eliminated ? UNLV won't stick around. My money is on them in the PAC, but they'd go to the AAC with AFA if not invited to the PAC. So there's 6. Other MWC schools have been on the phone with other conferences to see what their options are. Technically, it takes 9 members to dissolve the conference so that is unlikely. However, I don't see how the conference can justify even $10M/school as an "exit penalty," much less $27M. |
|
|
|
Post by zurac315 on Sept 17, 2024 13:13:48 GMT -8
How would it be right for SDSU not to spend millions and stay in a gutted MWC?
|
|
|
|
Post by zurac315 on Sept 17, 2024 13:16:13 GMT -8
Here's a question: Why is SDSU, Fresno, Boise, and CSU paying anything? PAC2 should pay it, after they already negotiated in bad faith, and broke their agreement. MWC didnt need to bail them out on scheduling. Now we're bailing them out again...Ok fine, they can cover the costs, since there is no other option. Am I wrong? Maybe they are bailing us out? From a dead end in the MWC? |
|
|
|
Post by namssa on Sept 17, 2024 14:58:59 GMT -8
There is belief that forcing the PAC2 AND the MWC school to both pay exit fees is double dipping and might not hold up in court. You can see this getting settled for far less.
|
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Sept 17, 2024 15:01:18 GMT -8
"You obviously haven't been paying attention." Truly amazing how people talk to each other on these sports forums. But no, I was referring to the scheduling agreement, designed to salvage their season, when the PAC2 became the PAC2. Ok so the new distribution system would be a benefit, so that is good. It's still $2.2M x 5 years or something in a rolling period. Again, the bigger question is if we're yet again helping them out, these are reasonable questions. The 14M or 16M we have in NCAA credits is divided 11 ways so those millions amount to about $1.5 plus, what, another $8 million from other members brings our total up to about $2.2M? Not exactly a windfall. Plus, in the new conference, post season money will be distributed in a manner that rewards those who earn them more than those who don't. The PAC2 never "broke their word" to us. Eight of the remaining nine were ready to sign the deal. It was UW who broke the faith. creating a domino effect with the others. You obviously haven't been paying attention. No, the auto-bid is not guaranteed but the PAC will be, by far, the strongest conference not in the P4 if they get whom they are targeting. Well, given what you've written so far you appear woefully uninformed. Just sticking with basketball credits, they are shared among all 11 schools (I expect Hawaii does not get a share) and are distributed over 6 years. Yes, of the $22-23M in tournament credits, the great majority is due to SDSU's success. Let's say those credits total $25M. That would amount to $25M/11/6 = $379K per year for SDSU. Chickenfeed. How are we thanked for bringing that money to the conference? The conference votes an extra 2 conference games to help teams like Wyoming and UNM and others who have difficulty scheduling good teams at home while limiting who we can schedule to build up our resume. I'm going to be much happier with a 16 game schedule than a 20 game one, and so is Dutch and anyone who roots for the program. Hell, the MWC should have voted to reward its premier basketball program rather than punish it. f x x x 'em. If we add Memphis and Gonzaga it will be a much better BB conference than we could have gotten from the MWC. You don't know, and neither do I, what expenses the PAC will be covering for moving schools nor what the cost of leaving the MWC will be, but you are sure quick to complain. By the way, I don't recall seeing you in any of the other threads about SDSU and conference realignment over the last couple of years. Those exit/poaching fees aren't going to total anything close to the $27M/school the MWC wants, however. I'll be surprised if they are over $10M/school. If the new conference can approach $15M per school I have no problem putting some money into the pot. Ore St. and Wazzu have come up with a plan that will get us out of this chickenshit conference which benefits them and us, as well as the other 3 MWC schools chosen. At $10M/departing school and figuring just 6 leaving, UNLV and AFA (to either the PAC or AAC), that leaves $60M to the 5 remaining full members and Hawaii. More than $10M each which is more than their worth over 5 years. I am sure USU will get a good look by the AAC and, perhaps, even UNM. |
|
|
|
Post by RiffelBooks on Sept 17, 2024 15:06:29 GMT -8
No doubt, and at the same time, always fair to question ROI relative to Risk vs Reward, which appears hazy at this point, given the lack of a TV contract and playoff guarantee. Spend money to make money. Ziegler's article today implied that there might be some negotiations going on regarding exit fees. We'll see. Sorry that some posters are ripping on you. This is a fair point, and the eventual reward is indeed hazy. Yet, we know the revenues from our current league, which are nothing exciting. If we had chosen to remain in the MW, and another school like UNLV took our place in the Pac, our outlook would be even worse. |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Sept 17, 2024 15:15:13 GMT -8
There is belief that forcing the PAC2 AND the MWC school to both pay exit fees is double dipping and might not hold up in court. You can see this getting settled for far less. I have made the claim that the MWC set the top when creating "poaching fees" for the PAC. I don't think of it as "double dipping" as much as the MWC has to quantify what damages they, and their members, sustain. If you use the fees paid by Texas/Oklahoma leaving the B12 and Houston, Cincy and UCF from the B12, then you will see a ratio of exit fee to media rights deal get a ratio of 1.4 to 1.6. The B12 exit fee for Tex/OSU was between $40-50M on a $32M media rights deal and, $10M for those leaving the AAC. The latter paid an additional $8M each over 14 years as a "late notice" penalty. SDSU's, CSU's and Fresno's media rights deal is somewhere around $4.5M. Te MWC can demand such exorbitant fees but they basically pulled those numbers out their arse. When asked to justify the amount with actual numbers, they won't come even close to the $18M they want to charge member schools for leaving. Both sides do have an idea what those damages are likely to be if quantified and will settle long before going to court. I expect the PAC to pay a little more to make the MWC just "go away." |
|
|
|
Post by docmm on Sept 17, 2024 16:56:00 GMT -8
ADLT said that no funds were coming from SDSU for this. From her email on the 12th: Importantly, no state funds will cover expenditures related to this move. Today’s announcement is the very first step in our next phase, and we will keep you informed of our plans. We appreciate the Pac-12 Conference for seeing the significant value in SDSU and the broad impact of our students, coaches and the broader community, and are looking forward to this exciting, new era.Now, that does not necessarily mean that no funds at all will come from SDSU, The athletic budget and SDSU Research Foundation manages money ( pots of money referred to) that comes from sources other than the State of California. While I understand the professor's position on this - there are certainly some serious danger signals flashing in just about every department except athletics, the premise that athletics should be supporting the academic program is shaky. If athletics is taking money from academic programs, that's a problem. But his case does not make this connection clear. Whenever there's an academic money crunch, administration and athletics gets the microscopic treatment. While the administrative side certainly deserves it - the number of AVPs is now ridiculous. Just what does the President even do anymore besides host parties and glad hand donors? But athletics - per se - is not part of the problem with budget woes. The "pots of money" can come from various sources. Donors are a big source - not necessarily at SDSU, but their donations to athletics do matter. Other sources probably include media rights, NCAA Tournament shares, "paid to play" games (though SDSU may not be getting many of those anymore) as well as ticket sales for sporting events. None of these sources are ever directed to academics. Just as research grants, industry grants and donations, etc. are not typically directed to athletics. I get that the professor is unhappy with the way academics always gets the shaft - and that it feels like athletics works outside the system - but he's not going to get any sympathy here. When the professor can get 12,414 people to come to his English class, he'll maybe have a point. |
|
|
|
Post by junior on Sept 17, 2024 17:04:42 GMT -8
ADLT said that no funds were coming from SDSU for this. From her email on the 12th: Importantly, no state funds will cover expenditures related to this move. Today’s announcement is the very first step in our next phase, and we will keep you informed of our plans. We appreciate the Pac-12 Conference for seeing the significant value in SDSU and the broad impact of our students, coaches and the broader community, and are looking forward to this exciting, new era.Now, that does not necessarily mean that no funds at all will come from SDSU, The athletic budget and SDSU Research Foundation manages money ( pots of money referred to) that comes from sources other than the State of California. While I understand the professor's position on this - there are certainly some serious danger signals flashing in just about every department except athletics, the premise that athletics should be supporting the academic program is shaky. If athletics is taking money from academic programs, that's a problem. But his case does not make this connection clear. Whenever there's an academic money crunch, administration and athletics gets the microscopic treatment. While the administrative side certainly deserves it - the number of AVPs is now ridiculous. Just what does the President even do anymore besides host parties and glad hand donors? But athletics - per se - is not part of the problem with budget woes. The "pots of money" can come from various sources. Donors are a big source - not necessarily at SDSU, but their donations to athletics do matter. Other sources probably include media rights, NCAA Tournament shares, "paid to play" games (though SDSU may not be getting many of those anymore) as well as ticket sales for sporting events. None of these sources are ever directed to academics. Just as research grants, industry grants and donations, etc. are not typically directed to athletics. I get that the professor is unhappy with the way academics always gets the shaft - and that it feels like athletics works outside the system - but he's not going to get any sympathy here. When the professor can get 12,414 people to come to his English class, he'll maybe have a point. He wouldn't know what to do with that many students - especially with the advent of AI … it'd crash the department servers. |
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Sept 17, 2024 17:50:00 GMT -8
How would it be right for SDSU not to spend millions and stay in a gutted MWC? How could a GUTLESS Silly Sensei know? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecdieheart on Sept 17, 2024 21:55:15 GMT -8
This is such old news. There has always been a minority
faction of SDSU faculty. I have always thought of them as
the “ we want to be Long Beach St” crowd. They don’t want to
have to work for grants, or be a part of striving to be
a research and center of excellence and innovation university.
They have no understanding of the steady reduction of State support and the necessity of increasing a diverse revenue stream.
Their biggest blind spot is to the fact that athletics is the marketing
arm of the university and an important part of the university fund raising and development and alumni programs . That is why Stanford, my other
Alma mater, spends 70-80 million on athletics.
This professor is clueless about how a university like SDSU
is funded and the importance of athletics to it’s overall success.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecdan8 on Sept 18, 2024 7:57:44 GMT -8
ADLT said that no funds were coming from SDSU for this. From her email on the 12th: Importantly, no state funds will cover expenditures related to this move. Today’s announcement is the very first step in our next phase, and we will keep you informed of our plans. We appreciate the Pac-12 Conference for seeing the significant value in SDSU and the broad impact of our students, coaches and the broader community, and are looking forward to this exciting, new era.Now, that does not necessarily mean that no funds at all will come from SDSU, The athletic budget and SDSU Research Foundation manages money ( pots of money referred to) that comes from sources other than the State of California. While I understand the professor's position on this - there are certainly some serious danger signals flashing in just about every department except athletics, the premise that athletics should be supporting the academic program is shaky. If athletics is taking money from academic programs, that's a problem. But his case does not make this connection clear. Whenever there's an academic money crunch, administration and athletics gets the microscopic treatment. While the administrative side certainly deserves it - the number of AVPs is now ridiculous. Just what does the President even do anymore besides host parties and glad hand donors? But athletics - per se - is not part of the problem with budget woes. The "pots of money" can come from various sources. Donors are a big source - not necessarily at SDSU, but their donations to athletics do matter. Other sources probably include media rights, NCAA Tournament shares, "paid to play" games (though SDSU may not be getting many of those anymore) as well as ticket sales for sporting events. None of these sources are ever directed to academics. Just as research grants, industry grants and donations, etc. are not typically directed to athletics. I get that the professor is unhappy with the way academics always gets the shaft - and that it feels like athletics works outside the system - but he's not going to get any sympathy here. Sorry, but if you're a tenured, published, literature professor, get your facts straight. Brian Dutcher was not hired 6 months ago, he has been with the program for over 25 years. And he has earned his salary with the one National Championship game alone. Plus, over the course of his 25 years at San Diego State, Dutch has helped the Aztecs reach the postseason 18 times, including 13 trips to the NCAA tourny, win a conference-best 16 Mountain West titles and record 19 seasons of at least 20 victories. How many millions upon millions of dollars of revenue has been earned up Dutcher? Add in ... how much revenue is the whiny professor generating for the university? |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Sept 18, 2024 10:59:58 GMT -8
Sorry, but if you're a tenured, published, literature professor, get your facts straight. Brian Dutcher was not hired 6 months ago, he has been with the program for over 25 years. And he has earned his salary with the one National Championship game alone. Plus, over the course of his 25 years at San Diego State, Dutch has helped the Aztecs reach the postseason 18 times, including 13 trips to the NCAA tourny, win a conference-best 16 Mountain West titles and record 19 seasons of at least 20 victories. How many millions upon millions of dollars of revenue has been earned up Dutcher? Add in ... how much revenue is the whiny professor generating for the university? Well, he is sending scores of English/Literature graduates out into the work force year after year. |
|
|
|
Post by AzTex on Sept 18, 2024 12:38:36 GMT -8
Add in ... how much revenue is the whiny professor generating for the university? Well, he is sending scores of English/Literature graduates out into the work force year after year. And McDonald's says "Thank you." |
|
|
|
Post by zurac315 on Sept 18, 2024 14:50:13 GMT -8
Well, he is sending scores of English/Literature graduates out into the work force year after year. And McDonald's says "Thank you." Hey, I like those burgers.  |
|
|
|
Post by Cwag on Sept 18, 2024 14:53:10 GMT -8
And McDonald's says "Thank you." Hey, I like those burgers. .50 cent double cheeseburgers today only! |
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on Sept 18, 2024 15:18:30 GMT -8
And McDonald's says "Thank you." Hey, I like those burgers. Not for what they cost now. |
|
|
|
Post by AzTex on Sept 18, 2024 15:23:35 GMT -8
And McDonald's says "Thank you." Hey, I like those burgers. Then you should thank English Literature graduates as well. |
|
Plus we lose millions from NCAA credits. IDK maybe Im missing the math here, but none of this makes sense on a pack of hopes coming from 2 who've already broke their word from a year ago.
