Poorly informed USD Writer

[Jacks_Backer]

Article was written in the Argus Life Section by a USD student. This guy needs to check some facts out before he writes an article.

http://www.argusleader.com/life/Mondayarticle5.shtml

Division I move was mistake for SDSU
YOUNG LIFE
By Jeremy Hoeck - For the Argus Leader

published: 1/3/2005

On Aug. 15, 2003, South Dakota State University officials announced they were making the transition from Division II to Division I athletics.

Now, a year and a half after that decision, many people are wondering exactly why the Jackrabbits made the "plunge." Did they rush into it?

And because this is the time of year when people make their New Year's resolutions, I think Athletic Director Fred Oien should reconsider the move.

In my opinion, SDSU's move to Division I athletics has been getting far too much exposure from news organizations in the state - including the Argus Leader. Why publicize the university's ill-fated plunge? Why not give USD its due? The Coyotes and their success have been overshadowed by the Jackrabbits for the past five months.

I might be a little biased because I attend the University of South Dakota, but I personally couldn't care less how SDSU fares in Division I. With every loss, with every setback and with every article, I laugh uncontrollably.

The one aspect of the plunge I don't understand is how Oien and his officials could defend a move without having a conference lined up first. A few weeks ago, the Big Sky Conference told SDSU "thanks, but no thanks" to its interest in joining the conference. Shouldn't that be the first thing the university ought to do? Talk about counting your chickens before they hatch.

Second, the enrollment and athletic budget of SDSU certainly doesn't fit a school in Division I. In fall 2004, SDSU's enrollment was reportedly 10,954, an increase from the previous year. But its athletic budget was $4.3 million, whereas an average NCAA Division I-AA school has an operating budget of $5.2 million. It doesn't look economically feasible for SDSU to become a full-fledged Division I school.

Finally, it seems to me SDSU sold out its conference and disgraced the state. The Jackrabbits had a long and storied rivalry with USD, dating back a hundred years. The North Central Conference was one of the most competitive conferences in the country.

Did SDSU just think it was too good for Division II? Was it just too good for the entire state? The university won't even be fully active in Division I until 2007. That is two more years of embarrassment, two more losing seasons and, for me, two more years of guaranteed hilarity. But unfortunately, that means two more years of unnecessary publicity by the Argus Leader.

Mr. Oien, I hope you're satisfied with your decision. I hope your new year is filled with sleepless nights, hair pulling 20-point losses and countless numbers of rejections by national conferences.

Happy New Year, indeed.

Jeremy Hoeck is a sophomore at the University of South Dakota in Vermillion.

[89rabbit]

Re: Poorly informed USD Writer

Really only one thing to say.

jackmd wrote:

"After reading all the posts from concerned USD, UND, UNO, and even timid SDSU fans (hereon referred to as "you&quot, I thought it was time to give all of you your own subject under which to post.  DI envy seems most appropriate, after all it is jealousy that underlies the feelings expressed by those oppossed to SDSU's move.  

Sure, there are feeling of inadequacy and inferiority also, but you can't blame us (SDSU supporters) for that.  As a former first lady once said:

"Nobody can make you feel inferior without your consent."  
Eleanor Roosevelt 1884-1962, American First

So, post away.  Some of us welcome your concern and hope that you keep SDSU in the forefront.  I am certain it also helps you deal with the feelings of inadequacy, inferiority and envy that have resulted from the bad choices you have made thus far in your life.  No worries, I anticipate you'll continue to make the same poor decisions in the future.
 
So, wish us luck if you have the respect and self-esteem to do so.  If you don't, do what you have to do to protect your fragile ego.  We're going to be here regardless."


Mr. Hoeck is a classic example. : I also agree with Jacks_Backer that Mr. Hoeck needs to get better informed on this issue.


Go State!  ;D

[Rodentia]

Re: Poorly informed USD Writer

It is pure D-I envy. The claims the author makes are bizzare at best. If the author actually believes the claims that he made, he should be expelled for stupidity - or should at least check his facts.

The author asks why so much attention has been paid to the D-I move - it's because it is a big story.

*****
The one aspect of the plunge I don't understand is how Oien and his officials could defend a move without having a conference lined up first.
*****

The author is correct about one thing - he does't understand. He assumes that teams normally can expect to have a conference lined up before making a move. This is simply false - it takes a while to find a conference. This is true for all teams that make the move to D-I.

SDSU's enrollment fits quite well with other D-I teams. SDSU's athletic budget may be slightly below average for a D-I team, but still falls well within D-I levels. In addition, the ahtletic budget is pretty good for a first year D-I team. (hint: it takes time to build up an ahtletic budget)

*****
Finally, it seems to me SDSU sold out its conference and disgraced the state. The Jackrabbits had a long and storied rivalry with USD, dating back a hundred years. *****

Few things in life are absolute, iron-clad 100% certainties. The fact that SDSU has not disgraced the state is one of those few things. The move to D-I has gone quite well.

USD could have made the move to D-I if they wanted to keep this rivalry going. The NCC was a very strong D-II conference. The conference as a whole - not just SDSU - outgrew D-II.

>Did SDSU just think it was too good for Division II?

That's the kind of crap that unambitious people use to put down those with ambitious people use to put down those who have ambition.

>Was it just too good for the entire state?

Just what is he saying? Is he claiming that SDSU is moving out of state? Or that South Dakota is a Division II state? I didn't know we had D-II states...

[OK_Jackrabbit]

Re: Poorly informed USD Writer

Must be some "Clips for Kids®" program to help poorly educated USD students get published.

I particularly enjoyed this little knot of contradictions:

"I might be a little biased because I attend the University of South Dakota, but I personally couldn't care less how SDSU fares in Division I. With every loss, with every setback and with every article, I laugh uncontrollably."

I'm not biased, but I am. I don't care. But I care. Up is up, but up is down.

Does anybody edit this stuff? Do they get away with that kind of writing in the journalism classes at USD? That paragraph would get a big red X from me, and the whole piece would get an F.

I'll email some people at the Argus to ask about it. I'll ask about having an SDSU student write a response.

[filbert]

Re: Poorly informed USD Writer

Mr. Hoeck's immature, whiney bleat should never have been printed by the Argus. He fails to understand that the D-I move is not about USD, is not about him personally.

He is one of those who believe in their soul that South Dakota and South Dakotans are not good enough to compete on the national stage, and anyone from S.D. who tries should be beaten down.

As to disgracing the state:
Ask Southern University fans and alumni.
Ask University of Kentucky fans and alumni.
Ask Texas State University fans and alumni.
Ask Tennessee State University fans and alumni.
Ask Northern Illinois University fans and alumni.
Ask Oklahoma State University fans and alumni.

For that matter, ask those associated with Rutgers, Southern Cal, Montana State, Purdue, Oregon State, Princeton, Cal Poly, Boston College, Wyoming, and an ever-growing list of prominent national universities who SDSU's athletic teams have competed with and sometimes beaten already, in their first transitional year of a five year process, a year in which SDSU doesn't even count as a D-I opponent.

Oh yes, if this is disgraceful failure, I can't wait to see what success looks like.

[Rabbitlivinginverm]

Re: Poorly informed USD Writer

Apparently Mr. Hoeck has some journalistic affiliation at the extrodianary U.

http://www.volanteonline.com/main.cf...tion=postreply

OK rabbit wrote,
"Does anybody edit this stuff? Do they get away with that kind of writing in the journalism classes at USD? That paragraph would get a big red X from me, and the whole piece would get an F. "

He is the editor.

He can be reached at jhoeck@usd.edu

[OK_Jackrabbit]

Re: Poorly informed USD Writer

Yikes.

But surely somebody at the Argus must edit the copy that goes on their Young Life page.... or maybe not.

Double yikes.

[Texas_Jacks_Fan]

Re: Poorly informed USD Writer

WOW... He and his university must be very proud.

Insted of whining about SDSU moving ahead, maybe he should spend more energy on forging a new "rivalry" with Augie.

[Alumguy]

Re: Poorly informed USD Writer

Young Mr. Hoeck has done us a great service.

[jackmd]

Re: Poorly informed USD Writer

Young Mr. Hoeck has done us a great service.

I couldn't agree more (or is it I could agree less or I couldn't agree less or.... nevermind).

This kids status at the U should be reevaluated. He is the disgrace to SD. I wonder what name he posts under on this site? Could it be the buff, mr, or yotefan?

Please publish more of this in as many places as possible, it can only help our cause. Not that we need that kind of help.

Last question (rhetorical), what USD success is he referring to?? (again let me reiterate, rhetorical question)

[Rodentia]

Re: Poorly informed USD Writer

*****
I'm not biased, but I am. I don't care. But I care. Up is up, but up is down.
*****

It's a poor attempt at rhetorical deception. Being personally interested in what happens to SDSU would weaken his credibility. So, he attempts to deflect this criticism by claiming to be a disinterested observer, when it is clear that he is highly interested.

The author would have you believe that a school should not move to D-I unless the following conditions are met:

1) The athletic budget is at least at the average of D-I teams.
2) The school has an invitation to a conference.
3) The school can be certain of being a winner at the D-I level right away.

None of these are true. It takes time to build up the athletic budget, no one gets a conference invite right away, and everyone has a very rough time with the move to D-I.


Did you know that half of D-I athletic budgets are below D-I average? Not very surprising, is it?

[89rabbit]

Re: Poorly informed USD Writer

Mr. Hoeck wrote:

http://www.argusleader.com/life/Mondayarticle5.shtml

"Second, the enrollment and athletic budget of SDSU certainly doesn't fit a school in Division I. In fall 2004, SDSU's enrollment was reportedly 10,954, an increase from the previous year. But its athletic budget was $4.3 million, whereas an average NCAA Division I-AA school has an operating budget of $5.2 million. It doesn't look economically feasible for SDSU to become a full-fledged Division I school."


His is wrong on both counts.  SDSU's last D-II budget, for 7-1-03 to 6-30-04, was $4.785 Million (Source is US Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Eduction)  This year, our first as a D-I school, the budget of course will be higher yet.  So to say the budget "dosen't look economically feasible" seems a little silly, at best.  

Before that he asserts that our enrollment "certainly doesn't fit a school in Division I", he couldn't be more wrong.  
 
http://www1.ncaa.org/membership/gove...t_sheet_d2.htm l  
 
According to the NCAA the avg. D-II school has an enrollment of 3,400 students.  Of the 279 schools that are D-II, 87.6 % have enrollments of 7,499 or less.  Only 12.4% of D-II schools have enrollments greater then 7,500.

Compare that to what D-I looks like.  Again according to the NCAA of the 326 schools that compete at the D-I level, the Avg. D-I school has an enrollment of 10,277.  With an enrollment this fall is 10,954 (he did get that fact right) SDSU sits above the avg. by some 677 students and we continue to grow.  

I think if Mr. Hoeck was honest with himself and let the emotion go he would have to agree that D-I is right where South Dakota State belongs.

Go State!  ;D    

[bisonguy]

Re: Poorly informed USD Writer

Do any of you write responses to these ill-informed articles and opinion pieces in the paper?

Some great reality on here- but the audience is somewhat limited.

Basically, I'm saying write a letter to the Argus responding to this idiot and set him straight.

[OK_Jackrabbit]

Re: Poorly informed USD Writer

Since I had a few minutes (I'm teaching an intersession class and my students are taking a test right now) I went back to the Argus to find the Jeremy Hoeck article. I went to Tuesday's (today's) Life page and clicked on the "Section Archive" link in the upper right to get the Monday version of Life.

Four of the five articles that were published in the Life section Monday (yesterday) are listed there:

--Workout Tools
--Some exercises to try
--Simple exercise plan holds promise to last
--Kids' public comments can make parents blush
--Many unaware heartburn can be treated

Oddly enough, there is one article missing from that listing. Jeremy's missive is still in their database via the link in this thread, but they have removed it from their archived Web listing of Monday's Life stories. "Mondayarticle1.shtml" to "Mondayarticle4.shtml" are all listed there. But "Mondayarticle5.shtml" is not.

So if a person doesn't have the link to it, the article never existed. Perhaps that can be considered tacit admission that it was a mistake to have published that piece of garbage in the first place.

[Texas_Jacks_Fan]

Re: Poorly informed USD Writer

Again, usd must be very proud of their campus newspaper editor, young Jeremy.