(02-15-2018 03:24 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(02-14-2018 01:02 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(02-14-2018 12:53 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Probably an exit fee of around $500K. But UND showed that may not be necessary, just sufficient notice of over one year. So in theory Sac State could pull it's Olympics from the Big Sky and put them in the Big West, say in 2019 or 2020 if they gave notice this spring without incurring an exit fee.

These things are governed by conference by-laws. If you follow those, no politicking matters.

That assumes of course:

1) Sac State administration wants to be in the Big West
2) They could arrange a football home (or drop football)

Football would stay in the Big Sky. UND gave notice they would leave Football, Sac State would not. That is the only difference. The Big Sky would not drop them, as they are part of the California triangle with UC Davis and Cal Poly, both part of the Big West for Olympics. Why would they? This would get the Big Sky down to 10 Olympic schools. Which means a nice round robin in Basketball and Volleyball. It also improves the compactness of the conference.

I did not address the political will or desire of the Sac State administration. That is a separate issue from the mechanics of a move. Right now Sac State's leadership is happy in the Big Sky. I'm sure most alumni and an overwhelming percentage of students would prefer to be in the Big West. Californians (excepting JDGaucho) overwhelmingly prefer to play California schools, who are the only rivals they see or care about.

(02-15-2018 04:11 PM)SactoHornetAlum Wrote:  

(02-15-2018 03:24 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(02-14-2018 01:02 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(02-14-2018 12:53 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Probably an exit fee of around $500K. But UND showed that may not be necessary, just sufficient notice of over one year. So in theory Sac State could pull it's Olympics from the Big Sky and put them in the Big West, say in 2019 or 2020 if they gave notice this spring without incurring an exit fee.

These things are governed by conference by-laws. If you follow those, no politicking matters.

That assumes of course:

1) Sac State administration wants to be in the Big West
2) They could arrange a football home (or drop football)

Football would stay in the Big Sky. UND gave notice they would leave Football, Sac State would not. That is the only difference. The Big Sky would not drop them, as they are part of the California triangle with UC Davis and Cal Poly, both part of the Big West for Olympics. Why would they? This would get the Big Sky down to 10 Olympic schools. Which means a nice round robin in Basketball and Volleyball. It also improves the compactness of the conference.

I did not address the political will or desire of the Sac State administration. That is a separate issue from the mechanics of a move. Right now Sac State's leadership is happy in the Big Sky. I'm sure most alumni and an overwhelming percentage of students would prefer to be in the Big West. Californians (excepting JDGaucho) overwhelmingly prefer to play California schools, who are the only rivals they see or care about.

As more and more time passes, we have now become accustomed to our Big Sky brethren. In 2 more years, we will have been in the Big Sky for 25 years. I'd say that's pretty significant. It would take literally SB, Fullerton, and Long Beach, maybe Northridge; to bring back football at the FCS level for us to move to the Big West.

I think most alums feel though that would should be at a higher level. There is a perception in the Greater Sacramento area that we should be FBS, only because of our professional sports affiliations. I mean we would sell-out Hornet Stadium for tier 2 professional football: World League for the Surge in 1992, CFL's Gold Miners 1993-1995; UFL's Mountain Lions 2010. Not to the mention the Kings, River Cats and Republic FC (the latter two being minor league teams in their respective sports who sell-out). That said, we'd feel more at home in a league with San Jose State, Fresno State, San Diego State, Nevada, etc.

(02-15-2018 06:48 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  

(02-15-2018 04:11 PM)SactoHornetAlum Wrote:  

(02-15-2018 03:24 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(02-14-2018 01:02 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(02-14-2018 12:53 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Probably an exit fee of around $500K. But UND showed that may not be necessary, just sufficient notice of over one year. So in theory Sac State could pull it's Olympics from the Big Sky and put them in the Big West, say in 2019 or 2020 if they gave notice this spring without incurring an exit fee.

These things are governed by conference by-laws. If you follow those, no politicking matters.

That assumes of course:

1) Sac State administration wants to be in the Big West
2) They could arrange a football home (or drop football)

Football would stay in the Big Sky. UND gave notice they would leave Football, Sac State would not. That is the only difference. The Big Sky would not drop them, as they are part of the California triangle with UC Davis and Cal Poly, both part of the Big West for Olympics. Why would they? This would get the Big Sky down to 10 Olympic schools. Which means a nice round robin in Basketball and Volleyball. It also improves the compactness of the conference.

I did not address the political will or desire of the Sac State administration. That is a separate issue from the mechanics of a move. Right now Sac State's leadership is happy in the Big Sky. I'm sure most alumni and an overwhelming percentage of students would prefer to be in the Big West. Californians (excepting JDGaucho) overwhelmingly prefer to play California schools, who are the only rivals they see or care about.

As more and more time passes, we have now become accustomed to our Big Sky brethren. In 2 more years, we will have been in the Big Sky for 25 years. I'd say that's pretty significant. It would take literally SB, Fullerton, and Long Beach, maybe Northridge; to bring back football at the FCS level for us to move to the Big West.

I think most alums feel though that would should be at a higher level. There is a perception in the Greater Sacramento area that we should be FBS, only because of our professional sports affiliations. I mean we would sell-out Hornet Stadium for tier 2 professional football: World League for the Surge in 1992, CFL's Gold Miners 1993-1995; UFL's Mountain Lions 2010. Not to the mention the Kings, River Cats and Republic FC (the latter two being minor league teams in their respective sports who sell-out). That said, we'd feel more at home in a league with San Jose State, Fresno State, San Diego State, Nevada, etc.

I think combining the two ideas would make sense, too. A league with a division made up of Sacramento State, San José State, San Diego State, Cal State Fullerton, Cal State Northridge, and Cal State Long Beach would have every CSU with an enrollment over 30k. But would it make more sense as FBS or FCS?

(02-15-2018 06:58 PM)SactoHornetAlum Wrote:  

(02-15-2018 06:48 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  

(02-15-2018 04:11 PM)SactoHornetAlum Wrote:  

(02-15-2018 03:24 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(02-14-2018 01:02 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  That assumes of course:

1) Sac State administration wants to be in the Big West
2) They could arrange a football home (or drop football)

Football would stay in the Big Sky. UND gave notice they would leave Football, Sac State would not. That is the only difference. The Big Sky would not drop them, as they are part of the California triangle with UC Davis and Cal Poly, both part of the Big West for Olympics. Why would they? This would get the Big Sky down to 10 Olympic schools. Which means a nice round robin in Basketball and Volleyball. It also improves the compactness of the conference.

I did not address the political will or desire of the Sac State administration. That is a separate issue from the mechanics of a move. Right now Sac State's leadership is happy in the Big Sky. I'm sure most alumni and an overwhelming percentage of students would prefer to be in the Big West. Californians (excepting JDGaucho) overwhelmingly prefer to play California schools, who are the only rivals they see or care about.

As more and more time passes, we have now become accustomed to our Big Sky brethren. In 2 more years, we will have been in the Big Sky for 25 years. I'd say that's pretty significant. It would take literally SB, Fullerton, and Long Beach, maybe Northridge; to bring back football at the FCS level for us to move to the Big West.

I think most alums feel though that would should be at a higher level. There is a perception in the Greater Sacramento area that we should be FBS, only because of our professional sports affiliations. I mean we would sell-out Hornet Stadium for tier 2 professional football: World League for the Surge in 1992, CFL's Gold Miners 1993-1995; UFL's Mountain Lions 2010. Not to the mention the Kings, River Cats and Republic FC (the latter two being minor league teams in their respective sports who sell-out). That said, we'd feel more at home in a league with San Jose State, Fresno State, San Diego State, Nevada, etc.

I think combining the two ideas would make sense, too. A league with a division made up of Sacramento State, San José State, San Diego State, Cal State Fullerton, Cal State Northridge, and Cal State Long Beach would have every CSU with an enrollment over 30k. But would it make more sense as FBS or FCS?

With SJSU, Fresno State and SDSU, it would have to be FBS. We can easily expand Hornet Stadium, I know Fullerton can expand Titan Stadium in their footprint. Davis can expand Aggie Stadium and I think Cal Poly could on the east side of Spanos Stadium. The wild card would be Long Beach State and could they add the east side stands to Long Beach Memorial? Right now the east side of that is LBCC's baseball field. So where would you relocate that? Plus there is a track there but you can also build stands on the north and south sides of the field a la Mackay Stadium in Reno.

(02-16-2018 01:24 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Nor would SJSU. Sac is not a rival for any of the FBS schools in California. Any "rivalry" talk is purely one-way.

I also think SactoHornet speaks only for some alumni, but not at all for the school as a whole. Yes, I thought about adding Reno to the Sacramento rivals, as they are pretty close by. But UC Davis is also a rival.

As for FBS, resources available, and alumni potential is at least 10x greater at UC Davis than at Sac State. If that school ever got a decent leader they would easily waltz up a level and be in demand. The leadership at UC Davis still acts like they are a small school with no prestige and no money. It's completely out of wack with reality. They think incredibly small time. I think it may be a but like UCSD, the students are going to have to drive a move up to FBS, because the UC appointed Chancellor's wont take the lead.

Sac State suffers from a small endowment, late start, and the restrictiveness of the CSU charter. Sacramento is now starting to get some real industry, but I expect, just as in the Bay Area, political pressure will be massive to make sure all projects and money from association with the growing industry will be done by the local UC (Davis) and not the local CSU (Sac State). That has played out elsewhere in the State, and I see nothing to lead me to believe it would be different in the Capitol, where UC power is even greater.

(02-16-2018 03:35 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(02-16-2018 01:24 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Nor would SJSU. Sac is not a rival for any of the FBS schools in California. Any "rivalry" talk is purely one-way.

I also think SactoHornet speaks only for some alumni, but not at all for the school as a whole. Yes, I thought about adding Reno to the Sacramento rivals, as they are pretty close by. But UC Davis is also a rival.

As for FBS, resources available, and alumni potential is at least 10x greater at UC Davis than at Sac State. If that school ever got a decent leader they would easily waltz up a level and be in demand. The leadership at UC Davis still acts like they are a small school with no prestige and no money. It's completely out of wack with reality. They think incredibly small time. I think it may be a but like UCSD, the students are going to have to drive a move up to FBS, because the UC appointed Chancellor's wont take the lead.

Sac State suffers from a small endowment, late start, and the restrictiveness of the CSU charter. Sacramento is now starting to get some real industry, but I expect, just as in the Bay Area, political pressure will be massive to make sure all projects and money from association with the growing industry will be done by the local UC (Davis) and not the local CSU (Sac State). That has played out elsewhere in the State, and I see nothing to lead me to believe it would be different in the Capitol, where UC power is even greater.

Actually, Sacramento State could take a page out of Cal State-Bakersfield’s book. Let UC- Davis try to join the MWC alone. The whole idea is DOA. The reason why is this: the Cal State campuses had no desire just to add UCSD, despite how bad UCSD wanted in. There is a huge rivalry between the Cal State system & the UC system. Sacramento State may not be a rival of SJSU, Fresno State, or San Diego State, but all three of those campuses would vote for Sacramento State before they would UC Davis. So, in strolls Sacramento State with a compromise: take us & UC Davis. That could work.

(02-16-2018 02:00 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  Is there any reason to believe that SDSU, SJSU and Fresno State embrace the same sort of CSU solidarity that the Big West CSUs do? It's not like the MWC is balancing UC vs CSU power blocks at the moment.

(02-16-2018 08:20 PM)teamvsn Wrote:  

(02-16-2018 02:00 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  Is there any reason to believe that SDSU, SJSU and Fresno State embrace the same sort of CSU solidarity that the Big West CSUs do? It's not like the MWC is balancing UC vs CSU power blocks at the moment.

Doubtful. I only know Fresno State well, but as far as the Bulldogs go they like having in-state rivals in San Jose and San Diego because fans can easily travel to them. But their primary focus is not on other Cal State schools, but looking at whoever is above them in the polls. Not only MW rivals like Boise, but other mid majors and P5 teams they might be able to schedule games with.

(02-17-2018 01:47 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(02-16-2018 08:20 PM)teamvsn Wrote:  

(02-16-2018 02:00 PM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  Is there any reason to believe that SDSU, SJSU and Fresno State embrace the same sort of CSU solidarity that the Big West CSUs do? It's not like the MWC is balancing UC vs CSU power blocks at the moment.

Doubtful. I only know Fresno State well, but as far as the Bulldogs go they like having in-state rivals in San Jose and San Diego because fans can easily travel to them. But their primary focus is not on other Cal State schools, but looking at whoever is above them in the polls. Not only MW rivals like Boise, but other mid majors and P5 teams they might be able to schedule games with.

Pretty similar at SJSU. It just been 5 years since we had a 10 win team to matter. May be another couple years before we have one again.

But yes we see ourselves beyond the California pale. SDSU definitely does. Our big rival is the CSU charter and the restrictions that do not allow the school to exploit it's position in Silicon Valley and up our standards. It's absurd. If the CSU system gave us the freedom, we could easily become a $Billion endowment campus given all the Industry here. But the CSU system doesn't want us to build differentiation between us and lesser CSU campuses like Cal State East Bay. We had a President who started pushing that direction and the CSU honchos came under huge fire from the UC honchos and we were forced to part with him, for a much less aggressive President. We have the potential to blow past SDSU (location, location, location). If we build the campus, the athletics will follow. But we lack the leadership ... by design. UC Davis has a similar issue. That is California higher education politics in a nutshell.

(02-20-2018 01:15 PM)joeben69 Wrote:  another driving factor for ucsd to upgrade to d1...
student enrollment expected to approach 40,000 students within the next five years (2022)...projected from 2017...but planning for 45,000...

Wait — UCSD planning for 45,000
https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2017/jun/26/stringers-ucsd-expansion-unsettling-neighbors/

UC San Diego News Center
Changing the Face of Campus
http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/feature/changing_the_face_of_campus

(02-17-2018 02:16 AM)SactoHornetAlum Wrote:  That's BS. Qayoumi left to become an advisor to Afghanistan's president after he had enough of your faculty whining, moaning and complaining about online courses. Had nothing to do with UC. What drivel!

(02-20-2018 01:15 PM)joeben69 Wrote:  another driving factor for ucsd to upgrade to d1...
student enrollment expected to approach 40,000 students within the next five years (2022)...projected from 2017...but planning for 45,000...
at 45000+ in student enrollment ...all things being equal...this would put ucsd at the top of the bwc as far as student population...

Wait — UCSD planning for 45,000
https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2017/jun/26/stringers-ucsd-expansion-unsettling-neighbors/

UC San Diego News Center
Changing the Face of Campus
http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/feature/changing_the_face_of_campus

(02-20-2018 01:38 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(02-20-2018 01:15 PM)joeben69 Wrote:  another driving factor for ucsd to upgrade to d1...
student enrollment expected to approach 40,000 students within the next five years (2022)...projected from 2017...but planning for 45,000...

Wait — UCSD planning for 45,000
https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2017/jun/26/stringers-ucsd-expansion-unsettling-neighbors/

UC San Diego News Center
Changing the Face of Campus
http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/feature/changing_the_face_of_campus

then just take ucsd and leave two spots open for, whomever in case an opportunity arises.

don't pair them with cal state bakersfield just for politics sake or to maintain a cal state - uc balance. bakersfield adds no value. the wac will be stronger without them.

(02-20-2018 01:38 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(02-20-2018 01:15 PM)joeben69 Wrote:  another driving factor for ucsd to upgrade to d1...
student enrollment expected to approach 40,000 students within the next five years (2022)...projected from 2017...but planning for 45,000...

Wait — UCSD planning for 45,000
https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2017/jun/26/stringers-ucsd-expansion-unsettling-neighbors/

UC San Diego News Center
Changing the Face of Campus
http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/feature/changing_the_face_of_campus

then just take ucsd and leave two spots open for, whomever in case an opportunity arises.

don't pair them with cal state bakersfield just for politics sake or to maintain a cal state - uc balance. bakersfield adds no value. the wac will be stronger without them.

(02-20-2018 01:48 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(02-20-2018 01:15 PM)joeben69 Wrote:  another driving factor for ucsd to upgrade to d1...
student enrollment expected to approach 40,000 students within the next five years (2022)...projected from 2017...but planning for 45,000...
at 45000+ in student enrollment ...all things being equal...this would put ucsd at the top of the bwc as far as student population...

Wait — UCSD planning for 45,000
https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2017/jun/26/stringers-ucsd-expansion-unsettling-neighbors/

UC San Diego News Center
Changing the Face of Campus
http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/feature/changing_the_face_of_campus

(02-20-2018 01:38 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(02-20-2018 01:15 PM)joeben69 Wrote:  another driving factor for ucsd to upgrade to d1...
student enrollment expected to approach 40,000 students within the next five years (2022)...projected from 2017...but planning for 45,000...

Wait — UCSD planning for 45,000
https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2017/jun/26/stringers-ucsd-expansion-unsettling-neighbors/

UC San Diego News Center
Changing the Face of Campus
http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/feature/changing_the_face_of_campus

then just take ucsd and leave two spots open for, whomever in case an opportunity arises.

don't pair them with cal state bakersfield just for politics sake or to maintain a cal state - uc balance. bakersfield adds no value. the wac will be stronger without them.

If UCSD had Football, then the P12 could look at UC Davis and UC San Diego as potential additions that keep the geographic balance. But they don't, so it wont happen.

It's great to see UCSD expand. I'd like to see Davis do likewise. That would ease some of the pressure on the UC system. It would be even better if Engineering slots were doubled, given the tens of thousands we import from out of State and Internationally for business here. We should develop that talent internally.

As for the Big West. It's a California conference, for California public schools. Whatever it was in the past it is no more. And it is very popular with the students and faculty, so that is not changing. I think the Big West would have preferred Sac State to CSUB, but Sac State was not ready to move.

(02-20-2018 03:16 PM)joeben69 Wrote:  

(02-20-2018 01:48 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(02-20-2018 01:15 PM)joeben69 Wrote:  another driving factor for ucsd to upgrade to d1...
student enrollment expected to approach 40,000 students within the next five years (2022)...projected from 2017...but planning for 45,000...
at 45000+ in student enrollment ...all things being equal...this would put ucsd at the top of the bwc as far as student population...

Wait — UCSD planning for 45,000
https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2017/jun/26/stringers-ucsd-expansion-unsettling-neighbors/

UC San Diego News Center
Changing the Face of Campus
http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/feature/changing_the_face_of_campus

(02-20-2018 01:38 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(02-20-2018 01:15 PM)joeben69 Wrote:  another driving factor for ucsd to upgrade to d1...
student enrollment expected to approach 40,000 students within the next five years (2022)...projected from 2017...but planning for 45,000...

Wait — UCSD planning for 45,000
https://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2017/jun/26/stringers-ucsd-expansion-unsettling-neighbors/

UC San Diego News Center
Changing the Face of Campus
http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/feature/changing_the_face_of_campus

then just take ucsd and leave two spots open for, whomever in case an opportunity arises.

don't pair them with cal state bakersfield just for politics sake or to maintain a cal state - uc balance. bakersfield adds no value. the wac will be stronger without them.

If UCSD had Football, then the P12 could look at UC Davis and UC San Diego as potential additions that keep the geographic balance. But they don't, so it wont happen.

It's great to see UCSD expand. I'd like to see Davis do likewise. That would ease some of the pressure on the UC system. It would be even better if Engineering slots were doubled, given the tens of thousands we import from out of State and Internationally for business here. We should develop that talent internally.

As for the Big West. It's a California conference, for California public schools. Whatever it was in the past it is no more. And it is very popular with the students and faculty, so that is not changing. I think the Big West would have preferred Sac State to CSUB, but Sac State was not ready to move.

the uc/csu balancing act in the bwc reminds me of the analogy of CSUs not being able to get into the pac-12 because the UCs will not allow it...

sdsu is nationally ranked university with a "Doctoral University" with "Higher Research Activity" (R2) status...sdsu also has pretty good athletics...what if sdsu gains membership in the Association of American Universities (AAU)...would that be a knock on the door of the pac-12???...or more like a kick???...just asking...