Success for SDSU Athletics

[Rabbit74]

Terry has a great article in the Argus today on SDSU's progress in the transition to DI and talks about future goals.

http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs...NEWS/707090330

The headline reads:

5 years after D-I decision, SDSU exceeds projections
Scholarships, budgets for athletics have doubled

There is an accompanying article on future goals:
http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs...NEWS/707090331

Both articles are front page main section of the paper.

You may also want to vote in the daily poll.  Today's question is did SDSU do the right thing in going D-I?  the poll is on the Argus home page.

[89rabbit]

Re: Success for SDSU Athletics

Again, because the Argus doesn't archive here is more of each story:

http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs...NEWS/707090330

5 years after D-I decision, SDSU exceeds projections
Scholarships, budgets for athletics have doubled

By Terry Vandrovec
tvandrovec@argusleader.com
Published: July 9, 2007

BROOKINGS - In February 2002, a Florida-based consulting firm called Carr Sports Associates released a hefty report titled, "Considerations for Division I Athletics at South Dakota State University."

By the time the school competed in its first NCAA Division I contest 21/4 years later, the document was outdated.

The primary reason: When the South Dakota Board of Regents approved SDSU's departure from Division II in December 2002, it ruled that the school's athletic department would not be allowed to operate in the red, period - let alone by six figures for four consecutive years, as the Carr report suggested would be necessary.

Jackrabbits athletic director Fred Oien ran into authors Bill Carr and Gerald O'Dell recently in Orlando, Fla.

"They laughed; they giggled," Oien said. "They can't believe where we're at. They cannot imagine that we've come this far, this fast."

For the five-year life of the Carr report, the Jackrabbits lagged behind in the number of suggested scholarships, partly because of post-publishing parameters set by the state. But in the past five years, the athletic budget has more than doubled, along with the number of scholarships available. Also, more than $8 million has been applied toward constructing and upgrading facilities.

At this point, and things change quickly in major college athletics, SDSU's reality is ahead of its plan.

More scholarships
Since the Division I transition began in earnest in 2004-05, adding scholarships has been the department's top priority. In the upcoming school year, that commitment finally will become obvious.

SDSU is scheduled to offer 205.65 scholarships in 21 sports, roughly 50 more than the average for schools with the same selection of sports that have been referred to as Division 1-AA for football. That excludes equestrian.

SDSU awarded 82.43 scholarships in 2003-04, its last year in Division II, and 95.19 when it made its D-I debut.

That last figure was far below Carr's suggested total of 152, which the Jacks didn't reach until 2006-07.

Why? Because it's a big jump, frankly, Oien said. Also, in 2004, the regents issued a statewide Title IX initiative that SDSU used to implement an equestrian program, add staff, upgrade facilities and accelerate scholarship gender balance.

Shortly thereafter, Oien issued a more realistic plan than the Carr suggestion, telling the Argus Leader that the goal was to offer 76 scholarships for both men and women by 2006-07.

The actual total, according to SDSU's athletic annual report: 83.5 per gender.

The recent scholarship push has been driven by football, because reaching the FCS maximum of 63 scholarships this fall will allow the Jacks to play Iowa State in 2008 - and collect $300,000 for doing so.

Women's programs have seen even greater progress.

In 2007-08, 103 scholarships will be available to SDSU female athletes. That's up from 29.14 in 2001-02, and it includes the NCAA-allowed maximum in cross country and track (18), equestrian (15), basketball (15), soccer (14) and softball (12). . . . (read more)


Go State!

[89rabbit]

Re: Success for SDSU Athletics

Also:

http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs...NEWS/707090331

Goals for next 5 years: Start building projects, add assistant coaches

By Terry Vandrovec
tvandrovec@argusleader.com
Published: July 9, 2007

BROOKINGS - The life span of the Carr report, South Dakota State's five-year road map for the NCAA Division I transition, has expired.

So what's the plan for the next five years in terms of scholarships, facilities and budgets?



A worksheet given to coaches projects 222 available scholarships during the 2011-12 school year - 20.2 shy of the D-I maximum in the sports the school offers. Any more might require adding a women's sport, Athletic Director Fred Oien said, and that hasn't been discussed.


SDSU published a 25-year facility plan roughly five years ago. The projects that have yet to begin: new football grandstands, an outdoor track, a multisport indoor practice facility, and a student athletic development center that would house the football, baseball, softball, soccer and track programs. The development center probably is next on the agenda. That will be driven by donor dollars and the approval of policymakers, Oien said.


With scholarship additions eventually slowing, travel becoming more predictable because of conference affiliation and the Title IX projects nearing completion, the budget should level off - in theory. However, Oien doesn't foresee that.


In terms of staffing, adding full-time assistants in baseball, softball and wrestling are short-term goals, an academic counselor will begin in 2009-10 and one more assistant each in men's and women's basketball will be added within five years as required by the Summit League.  .  .  .  (read more)


Go State!  

[89rabbit]

Re: Success for SDSU Athletics

Here is video of Dr. Oein, Coach Nagy, and Coach Johnston from the story:

http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs...VIDEO/70702025

Go State!  

[CatchEmAll]

Re: Success for SDSU Athletics

I would just like to add for all of the people who came into the ticket office during the early stages of the study and proposals and complained to no end that this would be the end of SDSU athletics and their support... :P :P :P :P :P :P :P

[Haldersham]

Re: Success for SDSU Athletics

I would just like to add for all of the people who came into the ticket office during the early stages of the study and proposals and complained to no end that this would be the end of SDSU athletics and their support... :P :P :P :P :P :P :P

NOW NOW Catchem!! We all make mistakes This is great news. Thanks Terry for reporting it accurately.


With tongue in cheeck what do we do when we reach the maximum of scholarships allowed under D1? Only twenty shy.

I could see in my own mind after winning the BB national in 1963, that SDSU could some day end up playing in the Missouri Valley Conference. The program look so great  after 1963 only to take a few steps backward in the following years. I am thinking that more and more people on campus  are probably wondering why the move was not made sooner. I do credit the much younger alums who seem to be so interested and passionate about SDSU athletics.  The passion since 1986 when I resume attending SDSU event has more than tripled. This is what it takes.

Membership in the MVC could still happen.

[jackrabit1]

Re: Success for SDSU Athletics

Before we talk about moving on to "Greener Pastures" in the MVC... let's work on improving things in the Summit League.

We have an unique opportunity to really take the reins and be one of the catalysts in turning around what has been a conference in the doldrums. So far, the Summit has put a good amount of trust in us by hosting the conference basketball tournaments over the next couple of years.

Commissioner Douple has already set out the framework for making the Summit one of the best mid-major conferences in the country. And I think most of the schools are excited to get onboard this plan. It's ambitious, but I think that when all is said and done, SDSU might not need to "jump ship" to the MVC.

[JackJD]

Re: Success for SDSU Athletics

I second Jackrabbit1's motion. Just watch what the addition of SDSU and NDSU does to the Gateway Football Conference: it solidifies it's position as the pre-eminent FCS conference. Can we do the same for the Summit League...be a part of that league's rise to the top of the mid-major ranks? The answer is Yes.

[NorCalJack]

Re: Success for SDSU Athletics

Two more great articles from Terry V. and this keeps SDSU on the front page of the Argus during a slow period. Thanks again Terry V.

Go State!!! 8-) 8-) 8-)

[SUPERBUNNY]

Re: Success for SDSU Athletics

Establishing SDSU as a premier member of the Summitt League has got be a top goal in the next couple of years. The more success that we have, the better we will look to other conferences in the future.

It is a real possibility that SDSU and NDSU coulod move to other conferences a ways down the road. Any conference is going to want to add universities that strengthen their conference overall. Conference options would be nice wouldn't it? SDSU has been a little lucky so far but now has a lot more control over its own destiny!

Bottom line is it comes down to having a great university along with winning programs. SDSU is a great school and making solid progress on the win aspect as well!

SUPERBUNNY

[Haldersham]

Re: Success for SDSU Athletics

Before we talk about moving on to "Greener Pastures" in the MVC... let's work on improving things in the Summit League.

We have an unique opportunity to really take the reins and be one of the catalysts in turning around what has been a conference in the doldrums. So far, the Summit has put a good amount of trust in us by hosting the conference basketball tournaments over the next couple of years.

Commissioner Douple has already set out the framework for making the Summit one of the best mid-major conferences in the country. And I think most of the schools are excited to get onboard this plan. It's ambitious, but I think that when all is said and done, SDSU might not need to "jump ship" to the MVC.

I dont want to pick a fight here, but I did not make a motion to move on to greener pastures. All I was saying was we are basically moving in the right  direction and I was impressed. I also said membership in the MVC could still happen. I did not say when nor or was I advocating a move. I agree we do have to make our presence known in the Summit. If it means 10,20, 30 years in the Summit so be it. I have no quarrels with Douple or anyone else in the Summit.  What success we will have in the Summit is anyone's guess.

If I had mentioned D1 back in my student days which included 1963, I would have been stoned to death or I probably would gotten free transportation to a southern town on the Missouri river that is soon to get a new bridge. BTW Jackrabbit1, I am more than double the age you have listed in your profile, so maybe 30 or 40 years from now, you will see a complety different athletic department with different programs. I dont dare predict what that might look like.

[Rabbit74]

Re: Success for SDSU Athletics

Check out Terry's blog that was just posted. It provides some additional important and positive insights that did'n make today's article in the Argus.


http://blogs.argusleadermedia.com/sports/

For example, from the blog:

So will SDSU be content to settle in to old rivalries bearing new costs, or will it use the momentum made possible by the foresight of its leaders to become something better?

I get the impression that the folks inside Coughlin Campanile (that is where Pres. Chicoine’s office is, right?) have already decided.

There are very few opportunities to change your lot in life, and, for SDSU - long a merely above average program in the NCAA’s second-best class - this is one of them.