Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Why doesn't Sacramento St enjoy FBS level support?
Author Message
Sactowndog Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,544
Joined: Dec 2010
Reputation: 29
I Root For: Fresno State
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Why doesn't Sacramento St enjoy FBS level support?
(05-14-2017 01:55 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  None of you guys have a clue about the CSU system. If you knew what it was, you'd realize it is a miracle there are three FBS schools from their ranks.

These various Cal States are not comparable to the likes of Mississippi State, Kansas State, Oregon State, Colorado State, or even Utah State. They are not residential schools (Cal Poly the lone exception), they are by and large commuter schools, with a majority of community college transfers finishing their degrees. They are drive-by schools with all the school spirit of a community college - yes these places are dead. They don't have any Carnegie R1 or R2 ratings (SDSU an exception).

We sometimes say, in California we have the best tier-1 system (UC) in the nation, and a below average tier-3 system (CSU). The gap is massive and greater than any other state I can think of with two statewide systems.

On the west coast, probably more than anywhere else in the nation, to have strong support you need to draw from the alumni and the students. The students must attend in large number (school spirit) and it must be part of the culture, which gets carried over to their later life as alumni. Beyond Cal Poly and San Diego State that is largely missing in the CSU system, but is abundant in the UC system. This corresponds to high graduation rates and younger average student age. If you don't have that you struggle. The reason you go to a Cal State is because you did your first couple years of GE and you can;t get in (or dropped out of) a UC. So you go to the one nearest home and get the degree you need to go to work. Not surprising donation rates are lower, and the low research rankings result in many fewer corporate sponsors and alliances. I am exaggerating a bit for dramatic effect, but the numbers back up the basic description.

If UC Davis ever gets sound leadership (right now it has very weak leadership), it is the one school in the Sacramento (and frankly all of California) that could move up to FBS. The CSU schools are as far up the latter as they can go. None are moving up in the next quarter century.

We shall see. I listened to my UCLA grad sister and brother in law comment the kids of their peers could get in the UC's people wanted to attend. These people donated money to the school and are starting to turn their back on it. Ca is ripe for the taking by the Big 12 if they had any clue.
05-14-2017 10:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Online
Special Teams
*

Posts: 884
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 41
I Root For: tOSU SJSU
Location:
Post: #22
RE: Why doesn't Sacramento St enjoy FBS level support?
Sactowndog,

You are a Fresnik loyalist. I understand the rose colored glasses you look at your school with. It was the last of the CSUs to fall off in attendance and start to have the feel of a commuter school. It used to be the thing to do in town, to go to Fresno State games, and that was where the pride came from. I know I'm from the last days San Jose State had some of that (less). But Fresno draws townees like no other school in California. It no longer draws them like in the 90's, but that is part of an overall trend. It will take a generation, but UC Merced will replace Fresno state as the campus Valley kids prefer to go to. That is another corrosive you are not accounting for.

UC Davis is growing and has a massive endowment. It has the infrastructure and financial capacity to be a major athletic power. The campus has the room to expand to over 50,000 students, if the political climate of the UC regents ever lifts the cap on expansion -- the political pressure to keep the campuses University of Virginia sized, in order to maintain UCLA and UC Berkeley, is the biggest constraint to their growth (that and poor leadership). Looking at current athletic department competence, as you are doing, is not a good long term model to understand the school's potential.

I do think five or six Cal States can move into the R2 category like SDSU and can become true tier-2 schools with much more selective admission standards, like the State Us in other parts of the country. But this requires either a change in the CSU charter, or far better the splitting of the CSU system into two systems, in order to allow for mission differentiation. California politics, and the Californian worship of elitism behind that thinking are the the two road blocks. I don't see any force out there to remove those.
05-14-2017 11:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,603
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 50
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Why doesn't Sacramento St enjoy FBS level support?
It looks bad when San Jose State is tier 4 for academics at Carnegie. Arkansas Tech is listed there as well along with Arkansas State and UCA. Little Rock is R3. I can't believe they are up there already.
05-14-2017 12:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Online
Special Teams
*

Posts: 884
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 41
I Root For: tOSU SJSU
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Why doesn't Sacramento St enjoy FBS level support?
Carnegie is research rankings, not academics per se. R stands for research.

Cal Poly has minimal research, but as a school ranks higher than a few UCs as far as selectivity. There are many schools with lower research rankings, but high academic rankings. Many Jesuit schools have very high academic standards and are well regarded, but do not have a Carnegie ranking.

An extreme example to illustrate: Dartmouth is not an R1 school, but Kansas State is. Is there any question that a degree in pretty much any discipline from Dartmouth is worth far more than a degree from Kansas State?

The point of Carnegie ranking is the impact it has on corporate support. SDSU has carved out a unique niche at the pinnacle of the CSU system. Many others could do similar if the CSU system were reformed to allow that. San Jose State ranks at the top of CSUs in terms of income for graduates, ahead of all but 4 or 5 UCs, because of it's heavy mix of vocational degrees (Engineering, CS, Chemistry, Business, Nursing, Criminal Justice) compared to the Liberal Arts heavy UCs. The school of course could be much more if unshackled by the constraints of the CSU charter, due to it's location and infrastructure.
(This post was last modified: 05-14-2017 03:56 PM by Stugray2.)
05-14-2017 12:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,603
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 50
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Why doesn't Sacramento St enjoy FBS level support?
(05-14-2017 12:37 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Carnegie is research rankings, not academics per se

Yeah, tier 4 is not really research. I know we added some technology research and do have a nursing program, and agriculture research for the farmers. We have been adding new degrees at the school in recent years. Before the research rankings came out last year? We were like tier 7. We are just one step away from getting the R3.
05-14-2017 12:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Online
Fighting the cartel 5
*

Posts: 7,577
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 296
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #26
RE: Why doesn't Sacramento St enjoy FBS level support?
(05-14-2017 12:45 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(05-14-2017 12:37 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Carnegie is research rankings, not academics per se

Yeah, tier 4 is not really research. I know we added some technology research and do have a nursing program, and agriculture research for the farmers. We have been adding new degrees at the school in recent years. Before the research rankings came out last year? We were like tier 7. We are just one step away from getting the R3.

How much research dollars did Arkansas Tech get last year? Not trolling; I'm interested
05-14-2017 04:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 415
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 15
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Why doesn't Sacramento St enjoy FBS level support?
I never realized to what degree the Cal St schools were forced to operate as commuter schools. So the state legislature won't let them have the dorms and infrastructures to provide traditional, on-campus experiences to California residents who either can't get into a UC or for personal reasons, like proximity to home would rather attend a Cal St.

In Ohio, Ohio State serves as our flagship and land grant. Miami has plenty of academic prestige and public ivy status but all of our other public schools with the exception of maybe Wright St are very much residential. There are a few smaller ones like Shawnee St who are primarily commuter based but they are NAIA and not NCAA D1.

You would think a state as large as California would have more public residential universities especially when unlike back east there isn't the vast number of private options we have in the Midwest and East Coast.
05-14-2017 05:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Sactowndog Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,544
Joined: Dec 2010
Reputation: 29
I Root For: Fresno State
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Why doesn't Sacramento St enjoy FBS level support?
(05-14-2017 11:46 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Sactowndog,

You are a Fresnik loyalist. I understand the rose colored glasses you look at your school with. It was the last of the CSUs to fall off in attendance and start to have the feel of a commuter school. It used to be the thing to do in town, to go to Fresno State games, and that was where the pride came from. I know I'm from the last days San Jose State had some of that (less). But Fresno draws townees like no other school in California. It no longer draws them like in the 90's, but that is part of an overall trend. It will take a generation, but UC Merced will replace Fresno state as the campus Valley kids prefer to go to. That is another corrosive you are not accounting for.

UC Davis is growing and has a massive endowment. It has the infrastructure and financial capacity to be a major athletic power. The campus has the room to expand to over 50,000 students, if the political climate of the UC regents ever lifts the cap on expansion -- the political pressure to keep the campuses University of Virginia sized, in order to maintain UCLA and UC Berkeley, is the biggest constraint to their growth (that and poor leadership). Looking at current athletic department competence, as you are doing, is not a good long term model to understand the school's potential.

I do think five or six Cal States can move into the R2 category like SDSU and can become true tier-2 schools with much more selective admission standards, like the State Us in other parts of the country. But this requires either a change in the CSU charter, or far better the splitting of the CSU system into two systems, in order to allow for mission differentiation. California politics, and the Californian worship of elitism behind that thinking are the the two road blocks. I don't see any force out there to remove those.

Just so you know, I went to Pomona College, had a father at Fresno and a mother and grandparents at USC. I have a sister from UCLA and another from Fresno and a wife who is a Washington Stare grad. So I'm far from a grew up and graduated from Bulldog. So I follow Fresno because I respected Pat Hill. We shall see what Tedford accomplishes.

I think you are ignoring a number of factors. One major factor is UC Davis has no path to FBS. It's not just Fresno that recruits the valley but also Reno, Boise State, San Jose State. None of those schools benefit from Davis going FBS. Had the WAC survived then maybe but the death of the WAC was the death of any Davis dream.

2nd Davis has not excelled in the sports where they are D1. They aren't a powerhouse in any sport. Even UOP which is in the same DMA has moved up to the clearly more competitive WCC and has competed for the national championship in Water Polo recently. Davis sent only two graduates to the Olympics. Not a very impressive showing.

As for changing the charter, I agree it will be a challenge. The UC's political will has blocked multiple attempts to the detriment of the valley. It needs to happen not because of sports but to address the economic development and lack of doctors in the valley. I see it happening one way or another in the next 10 years.
05-14-2017 06:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,603
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 50
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Why doesn't Sacramento St enjoy FBS level support?
(05-14-2017 06:36 PM)Sactowndog Wrote:  
(05-14-2017 11:46 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Sactowndog,

You are a Fresnik loyalist. I understand the rose colored glasses you look at your school with. It was the last of the CSUs to fall off in attendance and start to have the feel of a commuter school. It used to be the thing to do in town, to go to Fresno State games, and that was where the pride came from. I know I'm from the last days San Jose State had some of that (less). But Fresno draws townees like no other school in California. It no longer draws them like in the 90's, but that is part of an overall trend. It will take a generation, but UC Merced will replace Fresno state as the campus Valley kids prefer to go to. That is another corrosive you are not accounting for.

UC Davis is growing and has a massive endowment. It has the infrastructure and financial capacity to be a major athletic power. The campus has the room to expand to over 50,000 students, if the political climate of the UC regents ever lifts the cap on expansion -- the political pressure to keep the campuses University of Virginia sized, in order to maintain UCLA and UC Berkeley, is the biggest constraint to their growth (that and poor leadership). Looking at current athletic department competence, as you are doing, is not a good long term model to understand the school's potential.

I do think five or six Cal States can move into the R2 category like SDSU and can become true tier-2 schools with much more selective admission standards, like the State Us in other parts of the country. But this requires either a change in the CSU charter, or far better the splitting of the CSU system into two systems, in order to allow for mission differentiation. California politics, and the Californian worship of elitism behind that thinking are the the two road blocks. I don't see any force out there to remove those.

Just so you know, I went to Pomona College, had a father at Fresno and a mother and grandparents at USC. I have a sister from UCLA and another from Fresno and a wife who is a Washington Stare grad. So I'm far from a grew up and graduated from Bulldog. So I follow Fresno because I respected Pat Hill. We shall see what Tedford accomplishes.

I think you are ignoring a number of factors. One major factor is UC Davis has no path to FBS. It's not just Fresno that recruits the valley but also Reno, Boise State, San Jose State. None of those schools benefit from Davis going FBS. Had the WAC survived then maybe but the death of the WAC was the death of any Davis dream.

2nd Davis has not excelled in the sports where they are D1. They aren't a powerhouse in any sport. Even UOP which is in the same DMA has moved up to the clearly more competitive WCC and has competed for the national championship in Water Polo recently. Davis sent only two graduates to the Olympics. Not a very impressive showing.

As for changing the charter, I agree it will be a challenge. The UC's political will has blocked multiple attempts to the detriment of the valley. It needs to happen not because of sports but to address the economic development and lack of doctors in the valley. I see it happening one way or another in the next 10 years.

While Fresno State and others where still in the WAC? Cal-Davis, Sacramento State and Cal. Poly was asked to join, but turned down because of money issues. I do not think the WAC or MWC are blocking these schools because if the MWC gets raided? They have to look at the Big Sky schools to invite. Idaho should stay Independent for several more years. If Boise State gets an invite to a P5 conference? Idaho and Eastern Washington might get in. Portland State was also been in the talks to join the WAC as well along with Montana, Montana State and some others. So, I do not think there is any schools blocking those California schools from joining. It was Idaho that was being blocked from joining the MWC and New Mexico State.
05-14-2017 08:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,603
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 50
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Why doesn't Sacramento St enjoy FBS level support?
(05-14-2017 04:15 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  
(05-14-2017 12:45 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(05-14-2017 12:37 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Carnegie is research rankings, not academics per se

Yeah, tier 4 is not really research. I know we added some technology research and do have a nursing program, and agriculture research for the farmers. We have been adding new degrees at the school in recent years. Before the research rankings came out last year? We were like tier 7. We are just one step away from getting the R3.

How much research dollars did Arkansas Tech get last year? Not trolling; I'm interested

Been searching online and found this instead.
http://asumag.com/new-construction/arkan...ts-complex

Sounds like they might be adding more sports for the school in the future.

Can't find the information. They usually get a lot of funding for a lot of things that U of A does not. Emergency Management is one. ROTC is there. Education for Law Enforcement officers. NASA grants been rewarded. So many. It is usually in a lot of money.
Quote:Master's Colleges and Universities[edit]
Master's Colleges and Universities are institutions that "awarded at least 50 master's degrees in 2013–14, but fewer than 20 doctorates." [5]

Master's Colleges and Universities: Larger programs (M1) are larger programs that awarded at least 200 masters-level degrees (393)

We are M1 level. Under 20 Doctorates for the university. We usually get the information in the news, but I did find this.

https://static.ark.org/eeuploads/adhe/ATU_FY17.pdf

Saw that over $20 million dollars for Pell Grants from the feds, but I think there are more for the science department and all that. There are funding coming in for NASA.

The state gives out the appropriations.

http://www.dfa.arkansas.gov/offices/budg...iation.pdf

Arkansas Tech gets $234,923,981 of federal and state funds. That is a lot for a D2 school. UCA only gets over $108 million. UAPB gets even less.

Arkansas
Little Rock
Arkansas State
Arkansas Tech
Those are the top 4 in getting the funds. With that kind of money, and all that? They should be up there with UCA and Little Rock at D1.
05-14-2017 10:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2017 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.