nwp Wrote:So what plan or blueprint would the WAC need to provide a Sac St or UCD to be ready for the WAC ? Is it just too large of a financial project for these schools, or do they have deep pocket alums and corporate sponsors that could pull off the financial portion?

Both schools have an enrollment of over 27K so money is probably not an issue. Desire might be.

gaard Wrote:

nwp Wrote:So what plan or blueprint would the WAC need to provide a Sac St or UCD to be ready for the WAC ? Is it just too large of a financial project for these schools, or do they have deep pocket alums and corporate sponsors that could pull off the financial portion?

Both schools have an enrollment of over 27K so money is probably not an issue. Desire might be.

I'll preface this post by admitting that I may be a Davis homer to a certain degree. I have several friends who go to school there, and a couple of my friends in grad school are now on their faculty. I interviewed for a faculty position there myself, and toured the campus for two days and met with various administrators. So I may be biased now. But I have to admit that I was very impressed with what I saw.

The administrators at Davis basically told me that their goal is to be the next UC-Berkeley or UCLA. UCD is the only UC school right now with basically unlimited room to grow. (There's not much extra land in Berkeley or LA these days...) As a consequence, the California state legislature is pumping tons of money into their school to build new buildings, hire new faculty, and improve their facilities. Moreover, they made it very clear that they're not going to be content to be mediocre. They really want UCD to be mentioned together with Berkeley and UCLA 15-20 years from now.

Obviously, they were talking about academics, but I did find it interesting that they decided to move up to D1 at about the same time that they started their growth plans. It suggests to me that even if they were the dominant D2 school in the country, they wouldn't be considered a peer to their more prestigious UC brethren if they were still in D2. So I would be very surprised if the school were content to be an also-ran at the D1 level. And they'll definitely be getting a ton of state money to build up the rest of their campus over the upcoming years. I don't know how much of this money is going to be used for athletics (if any), but at the bare minimum, convincing their boosters to cough up money so that their athletics can be as strong as their academics doesn't seem like it would be a tough sell.

Anyway, that's my two bits worth. My opinion may be somewhat biased, but I would be thrilled to see UC-Davis in the WAC one of these days. A school with tons of money that's trying to emulate Cal and UCLA can only be a good thing for the conference in the long run, IMHO.

gaard Wrote:

nwp Wrote:So what plan or blueprint would the WAC need to provide a Sac St or UCD to be ready for the WAC ? Is it just too large of a financial project for these schools, or do they have deep pocket alums and corporate sponsors that could pull off the financial portion?

Both schools have an enrollment of over 27K so money is probably not an issue. Desire might be.

One of their main challenges is support (attendance and ticket revenues). Unfortunately, large enrollment doesn't always guarantee support (as SJSU is all too painfully aware of). With their football history, UCD is in a lot better shape than Sac St when it comes to alumni support, but they nonetheless have attendance problems. Hopefully the new stadium will make a difference.

I think SJSU is a good analogy for Sac St, and that that's common in the CSU system. Many people have the mindset that the CSU system should provide affordable education, and that athletics should be a low priority. There actually was a time when tuition at CSU schools was free for in-state residents (not to date myself, but I attended Chico St at the tail end of that era). ;-)

Sac St is a commuter school, although they'd like to get away from that perception, and athletics are irrelevant to the vast majority of students. They had tried to piggy-back a new basketball arena on the student-funded Recreation and Wellness Center, but it appears that politics scuttled that plan (not too surprisingly). On the flip side, with only the Kings and River Cats (AAA baseball) in town, they don't have much competition.

FWIW, here are some more numbers from Indy Star's database. Unfortunately, UCD isn't included (probably because they're still in D1 transition).

Total Ticket Sales (good indication of support?)
Fresno State....$7,651,092
Hawaii.............$7,330,652
Boise State......$3,556,301
Nevada............$2,419,251
Utah State........$1,032,946
New Mexico St..$1,029,077
Louisiana Tech.....$868,383
San Jose State.....$437,066

Montana...........$4,034,371
Montana St.......$1,249,578
North Texas........$420,729
Cal Poly.............$359,002
Texas St............$161,089
Sac St...............$115,652

2005 Football Attendance
Montana...............22479
North Dakota St....14160
Montana St...........13710
Texas St..............12875
No Colorado..........7510
Cal Poly................6959
Portland St............6597
UC Davis..............6337
Sacramento St......5833

oops...screwed that one up. (double post) :shhh:

CL - I remember when community colleges were free to residents. Is that still the case?

Interesting to see that Portland State, Davis, and Sac State attendance is very similar. Does anybody know what the attendance was when Davis played Sac State last year? Wondering how much higher it was than their average. That could be some sort of indication how attendance would look if they were in a conference that had SJSU, Fresno, and Nevada within 3 hours of their campus.

Heres what Sac State is doing to reach their "Destination 2010".

http://www.spanossportscomplex.com/

To be fair the MWC actually has more BCS wins than the MAC. Since 2000, Utah has beaten Georgia Tech, Arizona (2 times), North Carolina, Pitt, Texas A&M, Oregon, Cal, Indiana (2 times) and USC. That is 11 wins over BCS teams.

Since 2000, BYU has beaten Virginia, Cal, Syracuse, Georgia Tech, Mississippi State, and Notre Dame. That is 6 wins. CSU has beaten Colorado (2 times) and Virginia. That is 3 wins. Air Force has beaten Northwestern (2 times), Cal, and Washington. That is 4 more. UNLV has beaten Arkansas, Kansas, and Wisconsin. That is 3 more. New Mexico has beaten Baylor, Texas Tech, and Missouri for 3 more. Wyoming has beaten Ole Miss (2 times) and UCLA for 3 more.

TCU has beaten Northwestern (3 times), Arizona, Oklahoma and Iowa State for 6 wins.
Only 2 of TCU's wins have come as a MWC member.

SDSU has not beaten a BCS foe during that time.

So since 2000 the MWC has 39 wins over BCS foes.

Minus the 4 TCU won as a CUSA member and they have 35.

This does not include schools from C-USA that are now a part of the Big East.

Since 2000 in the MAC Akron has no wins against the BCS, Bowling Green has beaten Missouri (2 times), Temple (2 times), Kansas, Northwestern, and Purdue for 7 wins. Buffalo has beaten Rutgers for 1 win. Kent State has no BCS wins, Miami of Ohio has beaten Cincinnati (1 time while they were a member of the Big East), Northwestern, Vanderbilt, and North Carolina for 4 wins. Ohio has beaten Minnesota, Kentucky, and Pitt for 3 wins.

Ball State has no BCS wins, Eastern Michigan has no BCS wins, Eastern Michigan has no BCS wins, NIU has wins over Wake Forest, Maryland, Alabama, and Iowa State for 4 wins. Toledo has wins over Penn State, Minnesota, and Temple for 3 wins. Western Michigan has a win over Iowa for 1 win.

Toledo also had a win over Pittsburgh in 03.

Since 2000 the MAC has 23 wins against BCS competition. 3 of those wins were Temple, which is no longer BCS.

With Toledo's win over Pitt that makes 24.

Sorry to say it, but the MWC has done better especially considering they have only 9 teams compared to 12 in the MAC. I'm not a MWC homer, but they are the best non-BCS football league.[/quote]

The MWC has done better than I gave them credit for vs BCS programs, I'll bet they've played more BCS teams than the MAC has, however they do have a 35-24 lead on the MAC.

To be fair the MWC actually has more BCS wins than the MAC. Since 2000, Utah has beaten Georgia Tech, Arizona (2 times), North Carolina, Pitt, Texas A&M, Oregon, Cal, Indiana (2 times) and USC. That is 11 wins over BCS teams.

Since 2000, BYU has beaten Virginia, Cal, Syracuse, Georgia Tech, Mississippi State, and Notre Dame. That is 6 wins. CSU has beaten Colorado (2 times) and Virginia. That is 3 wins. Air Force has beaten Northwestern (2 times), Cal, and Washington. That is 4 more. UNLV has beaten Arkansas, Kansas, and Wisconsin. That is 3 more. New Mexico has beaten Baylor, Texas Tech, and Missouri for 3 more. Wyoming has beaten Ole Miss (2 times) and UCLA for 3 more.

TCU has beaten Northwestern (3 times), Arizona, Oklahoma and Iowa State for 6 wins.
Only 2 of TCU's wins have come as a MWC member.

SDSU has not beaten a BCS foe during that time.

So since 2000 the MWC has 39 wins over BCS foes.

Minus the 4 TCU won as a CUSA member and they have 35.

This does not include schools from C-USA that are now a part of the Big East.

Since 2000 in the MAC Akron has no wins against the BCS, Bowling Green has beaten Missouri (2 times), Temple (2 times), Kansas, Northwestern, and Purdue for 7 wins. Buffalo has beaten Rutgers for 1 win. Kent State has no BCS wins, Miami of Ohio has beaten Cincinnati (1 time while they were a member of the Big East), Northwestern, Vanderbilt, and North Carolina for 4 wins. Ohio has beaten Minnesota, Kentucky, and Pitt for 3 wins.

Ball State has no BCS wins, Eastern Michigan has no BCS wins, Eastern Michigan has no BCS wins, NIU has wins over Wake Forest, Maryland, Alabama, and Iowa State for 4 wins. Toledo has wins over Penn State, Minnesota, and Temple for 3 wins. Western Michigan has a win over Iowa for 1 win.

Toledo also had a win over Pittsburgh in 03.

Since 2000 the MAC has 23 wins against BCS competition. 3 of those wins were Temple, which is no longer BCS.

With Toledo's win over Pitt that makes 24.

Sorry to say it, but the MWC has done better especially considering they have only 9 teams compared to 12 in the MAC. I'm not a MWC homer, but they are the best non-BCS football league.[/quote]

The MWC has done better than I gave them credit for vs BCS programs, I'll bet they've played more BCS teams than the MAC has, however they do have a 35-24 lead on the MAC.

jediwarrior Wrote:CL - I remember when community colleges were free to residents. Is that still the case?

Interesting to see that Portland State, Davis, and Sac State attendance is very similar. Does anybody know what the attendance was when Davis played Sac State last year? Wondering how much higher it was than their average. That could be some sort of indication how attendance would look if they were in a conference that had SJSU, Fresno, and Nevada within 3 hours of their campus.

Heres what Sac State is doing to reach their "Destination 2010".

http://www.spanossportscomplex.com/

I don't know about the community colleges -- I've been in Reno for a little more than 25 years -- but yeah, that was the case when I lived in Calif.

Attendance for UCD @ Sac St is listed as 10187. UCD's attendance for their home game with Cal Poly is listed as 7890, with a note that that's a sellout.

As for Destination 2010, I wasn't clear on where the $25M in private funding was going. Those articles make it sound like it's going entirely toward the Rec Center and Field House...in that case, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the Arena to get built.

jediwarrior Wrote:CL - I remember when community colleges were free to residents. Is that still the case?

I have some friends at a few different community colleges near Palo Alto. They're not free, but they're incredibly cheap. (For a California resident who doesn't receive financial aid, I think they pay $10-$20 a unit or something like that.) And many students end up receiving financial aid that makes it essentially free.