Craig and Mike show live from Media Day

[jackmd]

Re: Craig and Mike show live from Media Day

A lot will hinge on the decisions of the BSC. If they determine that they want SDSU in, but with a plan to fully fund FB scholarships ahead of the current itinerary then I think its plausibel that wrestling or baseball could fall by the wayside, at least temporarily. You can't eat your cake and have it too.

When referring to some of the early "pain" that will be associated with the move to DI its not just in the win and loss column. There is a need to be realistic regarding funding limitations, facility shortcomings, and title IX. Lets play by the rules and make decisions that will be best for SDSU and the current/future students and athletes. With change comes uncertainty, with uncertainty comes angst and anticipation. The journey into DI is an exciting one, and I hope, a rewarding too.

[rabbit_tracks]

Re: Craig and Mike show live from Media Day

In regards to cutting sports, President Miller has said many times that she is GREATLY OPPOSED to it. When you talk about cutting sports to even up the scholarships betwwen men and women, baseball and wrestling would not get you far. There is only about 10 between the two of them right now. The loss would be far greater than the gain, IMO.

[Mike_H]

Re: Craig and Mike show live from Media Day

In regards to cutting sports, President Miller has said many times that she is GREATLY OPPOSED to it.  When you talk about cutting sports to even up the scholarships betwwen men and women, baseball and wrestling would not get you far.  There is only about 10 between the two of them right now.  The loss would be far greater than the gain, IMO.

Remember, it is not just about scholarships. It is about the number of people participating, coaches on staff, etc. There are constant discussions to take football out of the Title 9 equation because it throws the balance off so far.

jackmd: I like your attitude. Universities around the country have not exactly been racing to add programs to fund in the last few years. I agree wholeheartedly with your assesment. I think even staunch Jack's supporter will be upset by some of the choices that have to be made in the next few years, but if this really is about academics, research, and growing, as President Miller has said it is, then it will be even more important to look several years down the road for the good of the school.

[89rabbit]

Re: Craig and Mike show live from Media Day

I told them I would turn to you guys for answers! I'll check back later.

Mike,

I am not trying to be cute or anything, but you were in Brookings yesterday talking to Dr. Oien on the Radio. Why didn't you ask him these things then? If you needed additional clarification or needed to ask a follow up question because the answer given didn't make sense to you why not get it straight from the source rather then rely on Fans from an internet site.

I for one take Dr. Oien and President Miller at their word. I know it is your job to be skeptical and I appreciate you and the rest of the media for being there and doing your job. I for one am satisfied with the answer that Dr. Oien has given, if you are not perhaps that is an idea for a follow up show.

Go State! ;D

[jackmd]

Re: Craig and Mike show live from Media Day

This is a tough discussion for those of us not in "the know)" to undertake. I'm not sure anyone is certain as to what will happen. Especially with the conference affiliation question hanging in the balance. I doubt even Fred could shed certain light on these issues.

While the opinions of alumni are important to the administration, major decisions that will be necessary to ensure the success of SDSU as an institution at the DI level will likely be made without asking for our input. I am not asking for blind faith but I would encourage continued support as we move forward. Even if some of the consequences of the move are in opposition to your own desires.

[Mike_H]

Re: Craig and Mike show live from Media Day

Mike,

I am not trying to be cute or anything, but you were in Brookings yesterday talking to Dr. Oien on the Radio.  Why didn't you ask him these things then?  If you needed additional clarification or needed to ask a follow up question because the answer given didn't make sense to you why not get it straight from the source rather then rely on Fans from an internet site.  

I for one take Dr. Oien and President Miller at their word.  I know it is your job to be skeptical and I appreciate you and the rest of the media for being there and doing your job.  I for one am satisfied with the answer that Dr. Oien has given, if you are not perhaps that is an idea for a follow up show.

Go State!  ;D

As I have told you guys, I am not that bright. Also, as I have told you, I don't really care. There was one followup question that I forgot to ask, and I am sure that we can go back and check with jbnjbq for the transcript! That question had to do with the gradual increase in football scholarships as opposed to the BSC requirements. Again, these are questions that were brought up by people I talked to. It is always funny to me that one minute people think I should be a hard hitting journalist of some sort and another minute people think that I should just go along blindly with whatever is said by a person in authority.

A follow up show? Good idea! Do you think that if I sat on the campus of SDSU and badgered Fred during an interview that he would be happy to join us at a future date? Some people operate that way. I don't. I guess that is why I am "stuck" here in South Dakota.

[jackrabbit1979]

Re: Craig and Mike show live from Media Day

Mike,
Great show yesterday, you guys did a good job of covering all the sports and situations at SDSU including the D1 move at hand.  One point to argue with your last post, i do think you care somewhat about this situation or atleast it spurs your interest, otherwise why would you spend so much time on this board.  I don't think you are belittleing (sp?) the situation, but it sounds like that somewhat in your last post. You are on during all different hours of the day and during the evening which i assume is your "personal time".  If you "didn't care" i wouldn't assume you would spend that time on this board.  Of course you know what happens when one assumes something as well.

[Mike_H]

Re: Craig and Mike show live from Media Day

jack1979: Busted! You are right. I was being a bit flippant with that statement . I do have one question for you though.

Why didn't you challenge me on the "I'm not that bright" statement? ;D

[JBNJBQ]

Re: Craig and Mike show live from Media Day

.....There was one followup question that I forgot to ask, and I am sure that we can go back and check with jbnjbq for the transcript! That question had to do with the gradual increase in football scholarships as opposed to the BSC requirements. Again, these are questions that were brought up by people I talked to.
A follow up show? Good idea! Do you think that if I sat on the campus of SDSU and badgered Fred during an interview that he would be happy to join us at a future date? Some people operate that way. I don't.

Football Coach John Stiegelmeier indicated in your interview with him, that he would be adding 4 additional recruits each year until he reached the max of 63 in year 2011. He also indicated that you have to be at 60 for 3 years in order to count for the BIG Bowl Game.

year 1 2004-2005 38
year 2 2005-2006 42
year 3 2006-2007 46
year 4 2007-2008 50
year 5 2008-2009 54 * playoff eligible year
year 6 2009-2010 58
year 7 2010-2011 62

As I posted previously Dr. Oien indicated in his interview that we would be fully funded to 63 in football by the time we are a full member of the conference (I thought that was an interesting choice of words at the time, I took it to mean D-I). He also refered to that happening by fiscal year 2007(here I assumed he meant year five). That would require adding 6 additional scholarships per year in years 2-5. They are obviously looking at the situation from much different perspectives.

I take it all to mean that Stig was talking minimums, and Dr. Oien was talking what it would take to ramp up for a BSC membership? Certainly Dr. Oien would be in a more insider position, perhaps we are closer to a conference than we thought? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

[CatchEmAll_Guy]

Re: Craig and Mike show live from Media Day

Here is their point. 40% of the way is not all the waywhen it comes to fundraising. The equestrian progam is not in place yet. Money spent on expanding programs has come at the expense of the Wellness Center that would benefit all students at the University, in addition to being a large step towards establishing a quality football program to compete at the next level. New locker rooms facilities, which recruits have been told for the last two years "will be done by the time you are an upperclassman", are still nowhere to be seen. No one is in the "Big Sky", or any other conference, yet. How long does it take to build a softball or baseball stadium? If you have the money, not very long. When did building these things on campus become a priority? Are they being built with money that could have gone toward the Wellness Center or locker rooms?

I know this was about a dozen posts ago, but I don't get to spend my day watching this site to make comments. Just wanted to point out a few things though (not picking on you Mike, just using your post for reference).

The whole "wellness center/lockerroom" facility has been bantered around since atleast 1993. Back then student-athletes were shown a rendering of something that would be build before we graduated. And you can see where it's at. Right now there is money in place for a wellness center, just not the amount that was hoped for. Contrary to a statement made above, none of this money has been used to further any other programs. It is earmarked for a wellness center and cannot be used for anything else. One thing that other universities have used and SDSU has stayed away from is using student fees to build a wellness center. This would obviously help funding, but for now I believe student fees are being used to renovate the Union (someone correct me if I'm wrong). I doubt the students would support their fees being used for both at this point.

Another thing to keep in mind regarding facility upgrades is the University Master Plan. The University has a plan that outlines where new practice fields will go, but that is an ever changing document. The baseball practice field came about pretty quickly once they decided to go forward with it (yes it's been two years, but it's still there). Fields will be added over time, but they must go where the campus planners are certain no other facilites or roads will be needed.

I want to see upgrades as much as the next person, but realize it takes time for plans to matriculate. The Frost Arena seating plan took years to plan and that wasn't a huge undertaking. Imagine the planning and funding that must go into a larger facility or field that affects the cosmetic makeup of the university grounds. One would hate to end up with an eyesore or worse yet, something that must be altered/removed in a few years because of a change in the campus plan. We must remember that as SDSU grows so does the need for student housing, parking, and roadways. I'm guessing these are taking precedence over athletic facilities to some degree.

[1stRowFANatic]

Re: Craig and Mike show live from Media Day

Man, what a day to be at a training seminar on Work Comp. :-X :P :-X
Yesterday I missed most of the media day show due to phone calls. Mike, please send me an email at least 3 days in advance of any SDSU issues and I will unplug the phone. ;D ;D ;D

After reading all of the above, I think it boils down to, what else, but money. If SDSU gets the donations in fast enough, the move will be much easier than if we barely make the goals, or even worse, if we miss them. Having experience with fundraising for charitable causes, its my opinion that we won't get much more hard information until we near the end of the drive, unless some donor wants to a) make a splash and get his name on Craig and Mike's show , or b) gives a current dollar donation of around 20-25% of the total. Even if it is the second, the donor may want it kept quiet, but hopefully would allow it the $$ amount to be used to try and pry more money loose.

As for when the new locker rooms get built, it has been to long. I for one though think SDSU would have been foolish to forge ahead on too many facility plans in the last couple of years. The Admin correctly predicted that it would be controversial to make the move, & it was possible the Regents or Legis could have stopped it. If that had happened, the facilities needing to be built or remodeled would have changed dramatically. Is that the only reason they weren't done? No, but I believe it was one considered.

Good Discussion Everyone

[SDSUFAN]

Re: Craig and Mike show live from Media Day

I know this was about a dozen posts ago, but I don't get to spend my day watching this site to make comments.  Just wanted to point out a few things though (not picking on you Mike, just using your post for reference).

The whole "wellness center/lockerroom" facility has been bantered around since atleast 1993.  Back then student-athletes were shown a rendering of something that would be build before we graduated. And you can see where it's at.  Right now there is money in place for a wellness center, just not the amount that was hoped for.  Contrary to a statement made above, none of this money has been used to further any other programs. It is earmarked for a wellness center and cannot be used for anything else.  One thing that other universities have used and SDSU has stayed away from is using student fees to build a wellness center.  This would obviously help funding, but for now I believe student fees are being used to renovate the Union (someone correct me if I'm wrong).  I doubt the students would support their fees being used for both at this point.

Another thing to keep in mind regarding facility upgrades is the University Master Plan.  The University has a plan that outlines where new practice fields will go, but that is an ever changing document.  The baseball practice field came about pretty quickly once they decided to go forward with it (yes it's been two years, but it's still there).  Fields will be added over time, but they must go where the campus planners are certain no other facilites or roads will be needed.

I want to see upgrades as much as the next person, but realize it takes time for plans to matriculate.  The Frost Arena seating plan took years to plan and that wasn't a huge undertaking.  Imagine the planning and funding that must go into a larger facility or field that affects the cosmetic makeup of the university grounds.  One would hate to end up with an eyesore or worse yet, something that must be altered/removed in a few years because of a change in the campus plan.  We must remember that as SDSU grows so does the need for student housing, parking, and roadways.  I'm guessing these are taking precedence over athletic facilities to some degree.

Catchum All;

You are very correct in that the Wellness Center dates back to 1993. I was on the SDSU Alumni Council when the Visons Campaign was started by the SDSU Foundation.  For those of you who may not be aware, the Foundation and Alumni Associations are two different entities with different purposes. The foundation primarily raises money and the Alumni Association has more of a social function and keeps all alums connected to campus.  That said, the Visions campaign was to and did raise 50 million dollars. Among the projects in the Visions campaign were the additions to Engineering, Journalism buildings, a new Performing Arts building, Art museum addition, scholarships academic type, and the Wellness center.  What I saw in reports while on the council was 2.7 million had been raised for the Wellness center. Possibly 500 thousand had came from student fees as far back as 1993, as I recall Dr. Oien had to get Student Senate approval on that but the rest came from businesses in Brookings because, the city residents would also benefit from its use or could by paying a user fee.

 Catchum is absolutely correct in that this Wellness Center money is restrcited in use and that one use is the Wellness Center that has been approved by the Legislature last year in that they did not appropriate money, but they authorized the go ahead plans.  From what I understand the current Wellness Center plan has been scaled down to a 2.7 million dollar plan that fits the funds raised.  

The softball, baseball and socceer faciilitey are coming from some other source of funds. I have no idea what those sources are.

We are in a bit of quandry. Trying to compete in football with low amount of scholarships really looks scary, but the Big Sky is not about one sport, NAMELY FOOTBALL. Sure it would be great to go head to head with all the current members, but we have to follow federal law namely title IX and thats what is exactly happening now.

To have one of us this board win the Powerball and if your passion would allow you to turn the winnings over to SDSU, the problem would be solved. I  bought 10 bucks at  a time for a few weeks last year, but I wonder if that 100 bucks I spent on lottery tickets would not have been better used as a contributiton to the Jackrabbit Club instead.  I think if you can  make a small contribution, you should as its the small contributions that add up to real dollars over a period of time.  

The reason Coughlin has permenant seating on the west side only, is in my opinion because of one individual who insisted on long term pledges and scoffed at small contributions during the Staduim for State campaign in the late 1950's.  It happened a long time ago,  but I think SDSU learned from that mistake.

If you talk to any one connected to the SDSU Foundation they will thank you for a gift as small as 10 bucks.  So every dollar contributed counts. ;D ;D ;D

[SDSUFAN]

Re: Craig and Mike show live from Media Day

One additional footnote to my above post and why the Wellness Center has been slowed down to the gear called "stop". ( We are beyond the gear slow ;D), was because the campus master plan, when Dr Miller assumed the presidency, was very outdated, and one of her first actions was to update this plan. The plan updating meant every building project in the works was put on hold. I can remember Dr. Oien telling me about this at the golf outing in Volga, about 1999. Some one on Dr. Millers staff could no doubt explain what other factors that came into play, but both the wellness center and dressing room projects are long over due.
The orginal 1993 plan called for the wellness center to be located on the east side of the field and permanent seating on the east with new dressing room facilities.

I think what has happen is that people have come and went that were orignally involved in 1993 and when some one retires or leaves the campus, details fall behind in between the cracks.

I dont want to speculate further, but I am sure these projects will be completed soon. I think we just need to be patient.