Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
Author Message
Aztec Since 88 Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 117
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2
I Root For: San Diego State
Location:
Post: #61
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
SDSU is consistently on the top 10 list of most applied schools for undergraduate studies in the country. Last year they were 2nd behind UCLA with like 83K applications. SDSU was mainly a commuter school for most its existence. This is beggining to change as the cost of education is increasing and more students are choosing to stay in California for college than go out of state or to private schools. This why most of the top 10 applied schools are in CA.

The school and the CSU Chancellors office would like SDSU to increase their enrollment to better serve San Diego's growing population and need for higher educated employees. The City and County of San Diego would then benefit, as on average 60% of graduates stay in the area after graduating.
04-16-2017 12:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
Fighting the cartel 5
*

Posts: 9,189
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 341
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #62
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
Is SDSU an R1 Research school? I'm looking at a list of 120 or so schools in the Carnegie list and I see San Diego but not SDSU. I realize that you don't have to be R1 to be a good school but isn't San Diego St billed as a "research school"--?
04-16-2017 02:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,554
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 75
I Root For: tOSU SJSU
Location:
Post: #63
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
SDSU is an R2 school. They rank #149 in research, at a $93m R&D budget.

They are not chartered as a research school but are pushing the limits. But theya re probably as far as the rubber band will stretch. The CSU charter does not allow them (or any schools) to add the programs they need to be D1. A battle was fought in the late 1980s which was won by the UCs. The issue at the time was San Jose State's Engineering program (especially EE) which had gotten itself ranked among the middle of the UCs and due to the high number of units required (138) and impacting (required GPA above 3.6 and SAT above 1400), and gaining traction in fund raising. UC shut that down, forcing the CSU to order an end to impacting at SJSU and lower the graduation requirements for Engineering majors by reducing lab unit requirements. They found a willing ally in Gail Fullerton, who made her infamous statement, "I won't let San Jose State become a Taco Tech" in response to the movement toward turning SJSU into essentially another Cal Poly.

The gap between the UCs and the CSU schools has grown since then. This is why I am highly skeptical of SDSU's ability to push the envelope much further. As long as they are in the CSU system, they will be under pressure to lower standards. There will also be opposition to a mega campus of 40,000+ students. Put bluntly I don;t think they can count on another dollar of state funding. This is the political dynamic of California higher education policy.

If I could somehow be King for awhile in California, I would split the CSU system in two, plucking the highest resource schools to build a true 2nd tier system with residential housing and admission standards much closer to Cal Poly than the general CSU. SDSU, Cal Poly (probably both campuses) and San Jose State would be in that group of schools, and maybe two more (need one of the LA Basin schools, and maybe one more in the North). But that is not the situation today. SDSU is constrained by the CSU office. (I'd love to see SDSU and SJSU grow, with the largess of tech industry doted on them)
04-16-2017 02:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
Fighting the cartel 5
*

Posts: 9,189
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 341
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #64
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
(04-16-2017 02:58 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  SDSU is an R2 school. They rank #149 in research, at a $93m R&D budget.

They are not chartered as a research school but are pushing the limits. But theya re probably as far as the rubber band will stretch. The CSU charter does not allow them (or any schools) to add the programs they need to be D1. A battle was fought in the late 1980s which was won by the UCs. The issue at the time was San Jose State's Engineering program (especially EE) which had gotten itself ranked among the middle of the UCs and due to the high number of units required (138) and impacting (required GPA above 3.6 and SAT above 1400), and gaining traction in fund raising. UC shut that down, forcing the CSU to order an end to impacting at SJSU and lower the graduation requirements for Engineering majors by reducing lab unit requirements. They found a willing ally in Gail Fullerton, who made her infamous statement, "I won't let San Jose State become a Taco Tech" in response to the movement toward turning SJSU into essentially another Cal Poly.

The gap between the UCs and the CSU schools has grown since then. This is why I am highly skeptical of SDSU's ability to push the envelope much further. As long as they are in the CSU system, they will be under pressure to lower standards. There will also be opposition to a mega campus of 40,000+ students. Put bluntly I don;t think they can count on another dollar of state funding. This is the political dynamic of California higher education policy.

If I could somehow be King for awhile in California, I would split the CSU system in two, plucking the highest resource schools to build a true 2nd tier system with residential housing and admission standards much closer to Cal Poly than the general CSU. SDSU, Cal Poly (probably both campuses) and San Jose State would be in that group of schools, and maybe two more (need one of the LA Basin schools, and maybe one more in the North). But that is not the situation today. SDSU is constrained by the CSU office. (I'd love to see SDSU and SJSU grow, with the largess of tech industry doted on them)

Thank you for that info. I've been reading posts about SDSU growing and getting to different levels but I have always thought of SDSU as a commuter school with a ceiling that has already been reached. You are the first one in this post to say that. Not knocking SDSU, but there are certain limitations preventing them from being what they are. That's the case for most non-flagship, not elite private school across America. I think a lot of fans think they can change their school into one of those 2 categories, but I've never seen it happen in my lifetime.
04-16-2017 03:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jrj84105 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,140
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 33
I Root For: Utes
Location:
Post: #65
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
If the city of San Diego wants to pay for a college football stadium, they'd be better off building it for UCSD. Even with D2 athletics, UCSD has an easier path to P5 membership and eventual sustainability than SDSU. Probably belongs in the not fair thread.
04-16-2017 04:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #66
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
(04-16-2017 04:20 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  If the city of San Diego wants to pay for a college football stadium, they'd be better off building it for UCSD. Even with D2 athletics, UCSD has an easier path to P5 membership and eventual sustainability than SDSU. Probably belongs in the not fair thread.

Why would UCSD have an easier path to the P5?
04-16-2017 04:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Sactowndog Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,597
Joined: Dec 2010
Reputation: 29
I Root For: Fresno State
Location:
Post: #67
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
(04-16-2017 04:20 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  If the city of San Diego wants to pay for a college football stadium, they'd be better off building it for UCSD. Even with D2 athletics, UCSD has an easier path to P5 membership and eventual sustainability than SDSU. Probably belongs in the not fair thread.

UCSD and UC Davis have no path to P5 membership. The games played by the UC System aren't appreciated by the Cal State schools and UCSD and Davis will never be invited to the MWC as long as SDSU, SJSU and Fresno State are in the league. No other FBS league exists in the west.
04-16-2017 04:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GiveEmTheAxe Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 330
Joined: May 2011
Reputation: 14
I Root For: Stanford
Location:
Post: #68
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
(04-16-2017 04:33 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 04:20 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  If the city of San Diego wants to pay for a college football stadium, they'd be better off building it for UCSD. Even with D2 athletics, UCSD has an easier path to P5 membership and eventual sustainability than SDSU. Probably belongs in the not fair thread.

Why would UCSD have an easier path to the P5?

Because UCSD can someday occupy the same prestige tier as UC Berkeley and UCLA. At least that was the feeling I got from the application process in CA over the last two decades. In my time if you were a top student you would apply to some elite private schools, UC Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD and whichever other UC was most local to you, no matter where in the state you lived.

If UC Berkeley and UCLA could ever be persuaded to vote for another CA school to join the Pac -- big if, but maybe the non-CA members want to increase CA access someday -- UCSD is by far the best institutional fit.
04-16-2017 04:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GiveEmTheAxe Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 330
Joined: May 2011
Reputation: 14
I Root For: Stanford
Location:
Post: #69
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
(04-16-2017 04:42 PM)Sactowndog Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 04:20 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  If the city of San Diego wants to pay for a college football stadium, they'd be better off building it for UCSD. Even with D2 athletics, UCSD has an easier path to P5 membership and eventual sustainability than SDSU. Probably belongs in the not fair thread.

UCSD and UC Davis have no path to P5 membership. The games played by the UC System aren't appreciated by the Cal State schools and UCSD and Davis will never be invited to the MWC as long as SDSU, SJSU and Fresno State are in the league. No other FBS league exists in the west.

Agreed. Their only chance is a miraculous invitation straight to the Pac.
04-16-2017 04:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Sactowndog Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,597
Joined: Dec 2010
Reputation: 29
I Root For: Fresno State
Location:
Post: #70
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
(04-16-2017 03:22 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 02:58 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  SDSU is an R2 school. They rank #149 in research, at a $93m R&D budget.

They are not chartered as a research school but are pushing the limits. But theya re probably as far as the rubber band will stretch. The CSU charter does not allow them (or any schools) to add the programs they need to be D1. A battle was fought in the late 1980s which was won by the UCs. The issue at the time was San Jose State's Engineering program (especially EE) which had gotten itself ranked among the middle of the UCs and due to the high number of units required (138) and impacting (required GPA above 3.6 and SAT above 1400), and gaining traction in fund raising. UC shut that down, forcing the CSU to order an end to impacting at SJSU and lower the graduation requirements for Engineering majors by reducing lab unit requirements. They found a willing ally in Gail Fullerton, who made her infamous statement, "I won't let San Jose State become a Taco Tech" in response to the movement toward turning SJSU into essentially another Cal Poly.

The gap between the UCs and the CSU schools has grown since then. This is why I am highly skeptical of SDSU's ability to push the envelope much further. As long as they are in the CSU system, they will be under pressure to lower standards. There will also be opposition to a mega campus of 40,000+ students. Put bluntly I don;t think they can count on another dollar of state funding. This is the political dynamic of California higher education policy.

If I could somehow be King for awhile in California, I would split the CSU system in two, plucking the highest resource schools to build a true 2nd tier system with residential housing and admission standards much closer to Cal Poly than the general CSU. SDSU, Cal Poly (probably both campuses) and San Jose State would be in that group of schools, and maybe two more (need one of the LA Basin schools, and maybe one more in the North). But that is not the situation today. SDSU is constrained by the CSU office. (I'd love to see SDSU and SJSU grow, with the largess of tech industry doted on them)

Thank you for that info. I've been reading posts about SDSU growing and getting to different levels but I have always thought of SDSU as a commuter school with a ceiling that has already been reached. You are the first one in this post to say that. Not knocking SDSU, but there are certain limitations preventing them from being what they are. That's the case for most non-flagship, not elite private school across America. I think a lot of fans think they can change their school into one of those 2 categories, but I've never seen it happen in my lifetime.

The wildcard in the Deck is the current move by some in the Republican Party to split California into east and west. If such a move is ever to happen it will happen in the next two years. State Republicans want to do it to split off democratic electoral votes, add two Republican Senators. The House and Senate would approve for political purposes. Agriculture interest could support (fund) it to free themselves from overly liberal environmental constraints and water issues.

Should this occur the Cal States in the east could find themselves free of the education charter. The new State would need to ramp IP generation and fund Medical schools which mostly sit in the west. Depending where Sacramento County fell Fresno could also add a Vet school.

Fresno State would clearly be in the east. SDSU would be a possible.
04-16-2017 05:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nzmorange Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,000
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 279
I Root For: UAB
Location:
Post: #71
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
(04-16-2017 04:52 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 04:33 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 04:20 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  If the city of San Diego wants to pay for a college football stadium, they'd be better off building it for UCSD. Even with D2 athletics, UCSD has an easier path to P5 membership and eventual sustainability than SDSU. Probably belongs in the not fair thread.

Why would UCSD have an easier path to the P5?

Because UCSD can someday occupy the same prestige tier as UC Berkeley and UCLA. At least that was the feeling I got from the application process in CA over the last two decades. In my time if you were a top student you would apply to some elite private schools, UC Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD and whichever other UC was most local to you, no matter where in the state you lived.

If UC Berkeley and UCLA could ever be persuaded to vote for another CA school to join the Pac -- big if, but maybe the non-CA members want to increase CA access someday -- UCSD is by far the best institutional fit.

Is UCSD's academic ceiling really below <insert non-USC/UCLA/Stanford/Cal/Washington PAC school here>?
04-16-2017 05:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jrj84105 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,140
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 33
I Root For: Utes
Location:
Post: #72
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
(04-16-2017 04:53 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  Agreed. Their only chance is a miraculous invitation straight to the Pac.

The miracle would be Texas joining the PAC. If that were a possibility, UCSD would be the grease to get it done. Colorado, Utah, ASU, and Arizona would never vote to be in an 8 school new SWC Division with Texas and 3 friends (almost completely cut off from CA). The original PAC8 won't want to be split or to lose annual scheduling among the CA schools. There's no way the PAC can expand beyond 12, barring an NCAA rule change, and avoid deal-breaker scheduling scenarios.

That's gridlock. The only way to placate everyone would be to add a SoCal school to the East Division. That SoCal school would realistically have to be UCSD in order to satisfy University presidents and avoid breaking up the current CA schools. Having UCSD in Division and one cross Division game vs a CA school would guarantee the eastern division schools an annual CA game. That's the minimum requirement for an East/Wes divisional alignment.

Assuming the B1G picks up KU and OU to finish at 16:
UT, TTU, UNM (or Rice), UCSD, UU, CU, AZ, ASU is essentially your new SoCal-anchored Border Division. I think the SW schools would take their paycheck and Texas+SoCal recruiting access and be happy to leave the PAC8 intact. It wouldn't matter if UCSD sucked. In fact, it would be perfectly fine if UCSD were the Vanderbilt of this division.
04-16-2017 05:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GiveEmTheAxe Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 330
Joined: May 2011
Reputation: 14
I Root For: Stanford
Location:
Post: #73
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
The problem I see with that solution is that you just start a countdown clock to the day the 5 CA schools figure out how to end up together. In fact, I think any solution that involves divisions of 8 is going to face some level of instability.
04-16-2017 06:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GiveEmTheAxe Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 330
Joined: May 2011
Reputation: 14
I Root For: Stanford
Location:
Post: #74
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
(04-16-2017 05:40 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 04:52 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 04:33 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 04:20 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  If the city of San Diego wants to pay for a college football stadium, they'd be better off building it for UCSD. Even with D2 athletics, UCSD has an easier path to P5 membership and eventual sustainability than SDSU. Probably belongs in the not fair thread.

Why would UCSD have an easier path to the P5?

Because UCSD can someday occupy the same prestige tier as UC Berkeley and UCLA. At least that was the feeling I got from the application process in CA over the last two decades. In my time if you were a top student you would apply to some elite private schools, UC Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD and whichever other UC was most local to you, no matter where in the state you lived.

If UC Berkeley and UCLA could ever be persuaded to vote for another CA school to join the Pac -- big if, but maybe the non-CA members want to increase CA access someday -- UCSD is by far the best institutional fit.

Is UCSD's academic ceiling really below <insert non-USC/UCLA/Stanford/Cal/Washington PAC school here>?

Did you mean SDSU? Because UCSD is already above the bottom half of the Pac. And their ceiling is even higher.
04-16-2017 06:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jrj84105 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,140
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 33
I Root For: Utes
Location:
Post: #75
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
(04-16-2017 06:21 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 05:40 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 04:52 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 04:33 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 04:20 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  If the city of San Diego wants to pay for a college football stadium, they'd be better off building it for UCSD. Even with D2 athletics, UCSD has an easier path to P5 membership and eventual sustainability than SDSU. Probably belongs in the not fair thread.

Why would UCSD have an easier path to the P5?

Because UCSD can someday occupy the same prestige tier as UC Berkeley and UCLA. At least that was the feeling I got from the application process in CA over the last two decades. In my time if you were a top student you would apply to some elite private schools, UC Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD and whichever other UC was most local to you, no matter where in the state you lived.

If UC Berkeley and UCLA could ever be persuaded to vote for another CA school to join the Pac -- big if, but maybe the non-CA members want to increase CA access someday -- UCSD is by far the best institutional fit.

Is UCSD's academic ceiling really below <insert non-USC/UCLA/Stanford/Cal/Washington PAC school here>?

Did you mean SDSU? Because UCSD is already above the bottom half of the Pac. And their ceiling is even higher.

UCSD would be the highest ARWU ranked school in the B1G, ACC, SEC, and BigXII. It would be #4 in the PAC and #6 in the Ivy. That's why it would get invited to the PAC before SDSU.
04-16-2017 06:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jrj84105 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,140
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 33
I Root For: Utes
Location:
Post: #76
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
(04-16-2017 06:15 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  The problem I see with that solution is that you just start a countdown clock to the day the 5 CA schools figure out how to end up together. In fact, I think any solution that involves divisions of 8 is going to face some level of instability.

I think Texas would have something to say about that. The stabilizing part of this alignment is that neither Texas nor the CA block have complete reign over the conference. For once, UT would play the role of stabilizer. The Border Division, excluding UCSD would have a population of 43M compared to 49M for the coastal division. Swinging SD county's 3M to the Border division would put both divisions at 46M. The Border Division could stand on its own as well as the Coastal division, but neither grouping would have the critical mass alone to make a network profitable. We know that from the PACN, LHN, and non-existent BigXIIN. There would be a large financial incentive to stick together.
(This post was last modified: 04-16-2017 06:47 PM by jrj84105.)
04-16-2017 06:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Sactowndog Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,597
Joined: Dec 2010
Reputation: 29
I Root For: Fresno State
Location:
Post: #77
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
(04-16-2017 06:30 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 06:21 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 05:40 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 04:52 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 04:33 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  Why would UCSD have an easier path to the P5?

Because UCSD can someday occupy the same prestige tier as UC Berkeley and UCLA. At least that was the feeling I got from the application process in CA over the last two decades. In my time if you were a top student you would apply to some elite private schools, UC Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD and whichever other UC was most local to you, no matter where in the state you lived.

If UC Berkeley and UCLA could ever be persuaded to vote for another CA school to join the Pac -- big if, but maybe the non-CA members want to increase CA access someday -- UCSD is by far the best institutional fit.

Is UCSD's academic ceiling really below <insert non-USC/UCLA/Stanford/Cal/Washington PAC school here>?

Did you mean SDSU? Because UCSD is already above the bottom half of the Pac. And their ceiling is even higher.

UCSD would be the highest ARWU ranked school in the B1G, ACC, SEC, and BigXII. It would be #4 in the PAC and #6 in the Ivy. That's why it would get invited to the PAC before SDSU.

Sure and insure you start a riot among CSU schools and their graduates. Nothing like inciting class warfare in CA.
04-16-2017 06:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
Fighting the cartel 5
*

Posts: 9,189
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 341
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #78
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
(04-16-2017 06:40 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 06:15 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  The problem I see with that solution is that you just start a countdown clock to the day the 5 CA schools figure out how to end up together. In fact, I think any solution that involves divisions of 8 is going to face some level of instability.

I think Texas would have something to say about that. The stabilizing part of this alignment is that neither Texas nor the CA block have complete reign over the conference. For once, UT would play the role of stabilizer. The Border Division, excluding UCSD would have a population of 43M compared to 49M for the coastal division. Swinging SD county's 3M to the Border division would put both divisions at 46M. The Border Division could stand on its own as well as the Coastal division, but neither grouping would have the critical mass alone to make a network profitable. We know that from the PACN, LHN, and non-existent BigXIIN. There would be a large financial incentive to stick together.

Interesting.....So your saying if the PAC were to ever expand it would have to be the original PAC 8 "coastal" plus a "border" PAC division of Arizona, ASU, Utah, Colorado...plus Texas plus 3 of Tech/Rice/UNM/UCSD?
04-16-2017 06:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jrj84105 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,140
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 33
I Root For: Utes
Location:
Post: #79
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
(04-16-2017 06:51 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 06:40 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 06:15 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  The problem I see with that solution is that you just start a countdown clock to the day the 5 CA schools figure out how to end up together. In fact, I think any solution that involves divisions of 8 is going to face some level of instability.

I think Texas would have something to say about that. The stabilizing part of this alignment is that neither Texas nor the CA block have complete reign over the conference. For once, UT would play the role of stabilizer. The Border Division, excluding UCSD would have a population of 43M compared to 49M for the coastal division. Swinging SD county's 3M to the Border division would put both divisions at 46M. The Border Division could stand on its own as well as the Coastal division, but neither grouping would have the critical mass alone to make a network profitable. We know that from the PACN, LHN, and non-existent BigXIIN. There would be a large financial incentive to stick together.

Interesting.....So your saying if the PAC were to ever expand it would have to be the original PAC 8 "coastal" plus a "border" PAC division of Arizona, ASU, Utah, Colorado...plus Texas plus 3 of Tech/Rice/UNM/UCSD?

Texas, a required SoCal presence in UCSD, and 2/3 of TTU, Rice, UNM (or OU/KU, but I had them going to the B1G as the only move that would ever pry UT loose from the BigXII). I don't think the Texahoma 4 is realistic in any way now. There's really just no way they want to double dip into a low population state like Oklahoma. UCSD has th academic chops to balance a TTU addition if that's what Texas requires.
(This post was last modified: 04-16-2017 07:06 PM by jrj84105.)
04-16-2017 06:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
Fighting the cartel 5
*

Posts: 9,189
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 341
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #80
RE: SDSU FB - Boom or Bust?
(04-16-2017 06:57 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 06:51 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 06:40 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  
(04-16-2017 06:15 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  The problem I see with that solution is that you just start a countdown clock to the day the 5 CA schools figure out how to end up together. In fact, I think any solution that involves divisions of 8 is going to face some level of instability.

I think Texas would have something to say about that. The stabilizing part of this alignment is that neither Texas nor the CA block have complete reign over the conference. For once, UT would play the role of stabilizer. The Border Division, excluding UCSD would have a population of 43M compared to 49M for the coastal division. Swinging SD county's 3M to the Border division would put both divisions at 46M. The Border Division could stand on its own as well as the Coastal division, but neither grouping would have the critical mass alone to make a network profitable. We know that from the PACN, LHN, and non-existent BigXIIN. There would be a large financial incentive to stick together.

Interesting.....So your saying if the PAC were to ever expand it would have to be the original PAC 8 "coastal" plus a "border" PAC division of Arizona, ASU, Utah, Colorado...plus Texas plus 3 of Tech/Rice/UNM/UCSD?

Texas, a required SoCal presence in UCSD, and 2/3 of TTU, Rice, UNM.

So the 4 in already, UCSD, Texas, New Mexico and Texas Tech. The PAC won't allow itself to be like a Big 12 with a "gap", so if the PAC goes 16 with Texas, then New Mexico will be coming for the ride in kind of like a Rutgers/Big 10 thing. Plus New Mexico has century old rivalries with Arizona, ASU, Utah and Texas Tech. That helps. The shocker here to me is UCSD. Great school....but essentially a football start up. Rice already plays football. I've never thought San Diego St or Houston would get PAC invites. Just doesn't seem possible from what I know of the PAC and academics. My bet would be UT, UNM, Texas Tech and Rice.
04-16-2017 07:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2018 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.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.