Comments on: Fan Reax: San Diego State Should Drop Football

By: Ranchorich

Ranchorich — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 13:24:58 +0000

Good players make good teams and make coaches good coaches. How the hell can't you recruit good players when your school is in San Diego? The school is beautiful, the weather is perfect, the girls are gorgeous… what's the problem?

By: Dean Jones

Dean Jones — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 04:10:13 +0000

There's a simple solution- win football games. Winning cures a multitude of ills- many are financial. The dismal crowds are a reflection of the ineptitude of the football team. The finger can be pointed at current and former SDSU administrations. Making bad hires has been a huge problem starting with Chuck Long and going back.
The stadium lease wouldn't be an issue for the city if there were 35,000 instead of 17,000 in the seats. Anyone who thinks 35,000 is unrealistic hasn't been around long. Crowds of 35,000 at one time were considered dismal by many longtime fans. As far as the UT, reporting the lease problems aren't part of the vendetta- it's reporting. The vendetta is an 18 year long thing dating back to the early 90's (not the late 80's as earlier written). It is around that time that the spirit of the coverage changed (for the worst). An on-campus stadium needs to be considered, but the winning thing has to be resolved first. Elimination of the football isn't a solution.

By: bp

bp — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 04:25:11 +0000

There is no "vendetta" against Aztec football. SDSU invited the current crisis when it was finally revealed that SDSU refuses to pay honest rent for Qualcomm Stadium. Because of recent severe city budget cuts, this fact was finally properly publicized, and thus the current controversy. (The City "rents" to the Aztecs at far below the cost to open and run the stadium…. a City of San Diego subsidy of several hundred thousand each year.)

While the city is at fault too…they could start by firing the person at city rec who negotiated the lease…the blame lies mostly with president Weber. For years he has pushed his irrational support to the brink….every spare "discretionary" penny to the football team, then raising the student fees 200 percent….TWICE…against the wishes of the student body. (They overwhlemingly voted against the first fee increase for football…Weber did it anyway…the most recent increase Weber abolished the vote and had a puppet committee "approve" the higher fee.)

This happens at lots of campuses, but the current financial crisis in the city and state has finally made it a burning issue.

Of course SDSU should drop football….all sports lose money, but you could operate 6-8 non-revenue sports for half what they lose on football every year.

By: Dean Jones

Dean Jones — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 00:04:21 +0000

Yes, Zeigler touched on some points. Yes there are profs (and others) at SDSU who want the program canned. These profs have been calling for the demise of the football program since the early 60's (under Don Coryll- the best college coach NOT in the College Football Hall of Fame) to now- through GOOD and BAD. This fishrap newspaper has had a vendetta against SDSU since the late 80's. The timing of this article tends to make me believe that this was done with a vendetta in mind. HC Brady Hoke will be VERY BUSY trying in getting his staff hired and on the road recruiting. You can bet that everyone SDSU recruits against will be using this article against SDSU,. not to mention pursuading potentials coaching hires against coming here. But so far, so good (Rocky Long DC, Al Borges OC). As for the fish rap that ran that article- (I didn't renew my subscription) it's losing money. As for SDSU, I'll be once again purchasing season tickets for my family and unvited friends. Yes Zeigler touched on some truth, but he left alot out and wants the reader to believe that the only solution is to can the program.

By: Brad James

Brad James — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:22:29 +0000

This is all the fault of the BCS. If they had revenue sharing, which exists in the NFL, the king of kings, then San Diego State's athletic department wouldn't be considering giving its football program the clap.

By: Brad

Brad — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:33:03 +0000

For how much I love Air Force and the Moutain West Conference, I must admit that the conference isn't that tough top to bottom.

It's saying something that SDSU can't make a run towards the top of the conference every blue moon or so and/or get bowl eligable. Really, in the conference only Utah and BYU are able to put together a long string of good seasons. Colorado State and Air Force have had streaks of good seasons, but CSU has fallen quite a bit.

SDSU shouldn't be this bad for this long. There's something really wrong that they are.

By: Frank

Frank — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 23:38:57 +0000

I don't get it. I've been to San Diego, and it's a great city. Qualcomm's not much of a stadium, but it's good enough.

Maybe if the Aztecs consider building their own on-campus stadium, they wouldn't have to be in so much debt to the city, and the city can stop bitching about losing money.

By: Vandy Is Dandy

Vandy Is Dandy — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 22:54:51 +0000

The Aztecs shouldn't give up the pigskin so soon. Heck, if Vanderbilt can have a winning season (and win a bowl game for the first time in over 50 years!), then there's hope for everyone.

By: jerryshortbuss

jerryshortbuss — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 22:11:52 +0000

Women's volleyball has great potential to become a big collegiate revenue generator - provided the uniforms include some tighter shirts and ever shorter shorts.

By: Rick in Seattle

Rick in Seattle — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 21:46:05 +0000

Gee, everywhere else we are told that the football program's budget is sancrosanct, because it's a "revenue producer" for the entire athletic program. Maybe they should ditch the program, but I'd hate for them to start applying the same analysis to all the other sports. Few college sports, outside of football and men's basketball, can really claim to be revenue generators.