Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
Inbox

Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"?

Avatar

Posted: 7/30/2014 10:11 AM

Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 


Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"?

Who do you automatically think of when you consider the "haves" among athletic programs in the Mountain West Conference? You might lean on football familiarity and go with Boise State, Fresno State and San Diego State, among others. But you'd only be partially correct. There's a lot of concern in the San Joaquin Valley about what the pending divide between the Power 5 conferences and everybody else will do to the Bulldogs. The NCAA autonomy vote is next week. The Fresno Bee's Marek Warzawski points out that Fresno State, with $33.6 million in athletic revenues, lags far behind Mountain West leaders UNLV ($64.5), New Mexico ($44.3) and Boise State ($43.1).

Not only are the Bulldogs not positioned to provide cost-of-attendance stipends, they don't even have a football training table set up. Athletic director Thomas Boeh has said he hopes the conference adopts a set of uniform rules regarding athlete benefits—wishful thinking for a university that faces a challenge in that regard. Mountain West commissioner Craig Thompson indicates schools will make those decisions individually. When Boise State joined the WAC in 2001, it looked up to Fresno State in almost every way. It's been a wild 13 years on both sides.

TRADITION DOESN'T GRADUATE!  COACHES COME, COACHES GO, TRADITION LIVES ON

Don't get confused between my personality and my attitude!  My personality is who I am, my attitude depends on who you are!

#ATF

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 7/30/2014 11:07 AM

Re: Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 



BroncoBob wrote:

Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"?

Who do you automatically think of when you consider the "haves" among athletic programs in the Mountain West Conference? You might lean on football familiarity and go with Boise State, Fresno State and San Diego State, among others. But you'd only be partially correct. There's a lot of concern in the San Joaquin Valley about what the pending divide between the Power 5 conferences and everybody else will do to the Bulldogs. The NCAA autonomy vote is next week. The Fresno Bee's Marek Warzawski points out that Fresno State, with $33.6 million in athletic revenues, lags far behind Mountain West leaders UNLV ($64.5), New Mexico ($44.3) and Boise State ($43.1).

Not only are the Bulldogs not positioned to provide cost-of-attendance stipends, they don't even have a football training table set up. Athletic director Thomas Boeh has said he hopes the conference adopts a set of uniform rules regarding athlete benefits—wishful thinking for a university that faces a challenge in that regard. Mountain West commissioner Craig Thompson indicates schools will make those decisions individually. When Boise State joined the WAC in 2001, it looked up to Fresno State in almost every way. It's been a wild 13 years on both sides.

I warned for years on the BB what was negatively happening to Fresno State as a result of; John Welty, Pat Hill and Steve Cleveland (basketball). I was met with nothing but nasty disparagement and everything else vile by the naive, gullible BB what amounted to be worshipping victims. Now the rubber meeting the road has become a reality in the most unpleasant terms. 

I am a little more optimistic than Warzawsky simply because I have had far more years experience with Fresno and the Valley than Warzawsky. The Valley has responded before from dismal Fresno State circumstances and I am somewhat confident it will do so again.

More recently in Fresno State's athletic history it has been Jim Sweeney who awoke the Valley's "Sleeping Giant". Will it be Tim DeRuyter this time around? No one knows for sure of course, but DeRuyter is a good start. The San Joaquin is richer than it has ever been, but is Fresno State in the minds of the rich? This is what I see as the trick which needs to be turned for Fresno State athletics (football) to succeed. 

Though correct at the time and a job well done, I don't think Fresno State's current AD is the AD Fresno needs for its future. Fresno needs an AD visionary from this point on. Fresno does seem to have the correct President for the job, but it is way to soon to declare it to be the case for Fresno athletics.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 7/30/2014 7:20 PM

Re: Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 


The West division has some good recruiting hotbeds to fall back on. That won't doom them to facility hell (outside of SJSU, which is still trying to put it together). The Mountain Division has their facilities in the heat of everyone because of transplant recruiting....they have to have good facility to get California and Texas recruits to stay there.

But Fresno doesn't even have athletic table? That's a pure shock to me.

#RememberUAB

Image

Last edited 7/30/2014 7:21 PM by LetTheFurFly

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 7/30/2014 9:21 PM

Re: Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 


It'll be interesting to see what the conference decides to do moving forward. I heard Coach Bob Davie say at the media days that each school in the MW should offer the same benefits, make it equal across the board. Now we have Fresno saying the same thing. As a Bronco fan, it's a hard situation. I understand those school's positions but at the same time, Boise State can probably afford to offer above and beyond what the rest of the conference can. It's a dog-eat-dog world, survival of the fittest, college football.







"I've just got them listed as butt kickers and let them go from there." -Coach Drink
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/31/2014 12:16 AM

Re: Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 


I have no idea about Fresno State.

I do know that USU AD Scott Barnes and President Stan Albrecht have stated that if "cost of attendance" goes through, USU will find a way to make it happen.  Those two have been the driving force behind the resurrection of USU athletics in general, and football specifically.  Additionally, strange as it sounds to those not familiar with the program, USU has some deep pocket donors.  The Laubs, owners of Cache Valley Electric, donated the money for the indoor football practice facility and the new basketball practice / volleyball competition center.  The AD also established the Merlin Olsen Fund for Football Competitive Excellence, an endowment fund designed to take us to the next level.

Who knows.  If I had that kind of foresight, I'd be getting rich in the stockmarket.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 7/31/2014 12:56 AM

Re: Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 



LKGates wrote: I have no idea about Fresno State.

I do know that USU AD Scott Barnes and President Stan Albrecht have stated that if "cost of attendance" goes through, USU will find a way to make it happen.  Those two have been the driving force behind the resurrection of USU athletics in general, and football specifically.  Additionally, strange as it sounds to those not familiar with the program, USU has some deep pocket donors.  The Laubs, owners of Cache Valley Electric, donated the money for the indoor football practice facility and the new basketball practice / volleyball competition center.  The AD also established the Merlin Olsen Fund for Football Competitive Excellence, an endowment fund designed to take us to the next level.

Who knows.  If I had that kind of foresight, I'd be getting rich in the stockmarket.
AD Scott Barnes is a Fresno State grad and was a star basketball player while at Fresno State. Many Fresno fans wanted Scott Barnes over who Fresno now has as AD. However, the present Fresno AD did a great job cleaning-up a can of worms at Fresno State. The can of worms can be directly blamed on then President John Welty. They just don't get much more incompetent than Welty. 

Many would like to have Scott Barnes as Fresno's AD now and I think he is an AD with vision. Something Fresno's present AD lacks.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 7/31/2014 10:44 AM

Re: Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 



volklgirl wrote: It'll be interesting to see what the conference decides to do moving forward. I heard Coach Bob Davie say at the media days that each school in the MW should offer the same benefits, make it equal across the board. Now we have Fresno saying the same thing. As a Bronco fan, it's a hard situation. I understand those school's positions but at the same time, Boise State can probably afford to offer above and beyond what the rest of the conference can. It's a dog-eat-dog world, survival of the fittest, college football.
Why hold all the MWC schools to the lowest benefits afforded by the school with the lowest athletic Budget.
Boise State just sold the naming rights to Bronco Stadium in part to help afford the additional costs of player benefits.
TRADITION DOESN'T GRADUATE!  COACHES COME, COACHES GO, TRADITION LIVES ON

Don't get confused between my personality and my attitude!  My personality is who I am, my attitude depends on who you are!

#ATF

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/2/2014 10:54 AM

Re: Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 



BroncoBob wrote:
volklgirl wrote: It'll be interesting to see what the conference decides to do moving forward. I heard Coach Bob Davie say at the media days that each school in the MW should offer the same benefits, make it equal across the board. Now we have Fresno saying the same thing. As a Bronco fan, it's a hard situation. I understand those school's positions but at the same time, Boise State can probably afford to offer above and beyond what the rest of the conference can. It's a dog-eat-dog world, survival of the fittest, college football.
Why hold all the MWC schools to the lowest benefits afforded by the school with the lowest athletic Budget.
Boise State just sold the naming rights to Bronco Stadium in part to help afford the additional costs of player benefits.
Yep exactly. I guess I sympathize with other schools' situations but at the end of the day, Boise State needs to do what's best for Boise State. I don't think there's any way Hair Thompson makes it uniform across the board.







"I've just got them listed as butt kickers and let them go from there." -Coach Drink
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/2/2014 1:17 PM

Re: Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 



volklgirl wrote:
BroncoBob wrote:
volklgirl wrote: It'll be interesting to see what the conference decides to do moving forward. I heard Coach Bob Davie say at the media days that each school in the MW should offer the same benefits, make it equal across the board. Now we have Fresno saying the same thing. As a Bronco fan, it's a hard situation. I understand those school's positions but at the same time, Boise State can probably afford to offer above and beyond what the rest of the conference can. It's a dog-eat-dog world, survival of the fittest, college football.
Why hold all the MWC schools to the lowest benefits afforded by the school with the lowest athletic Budget.
Boise State just sold the naming rights to Bronco Stadium in part to help afford the additional costs of player benefits.
Yep exactly. I guess I sympathize with other schools' situations but at the end of the day, Boise State needs to do what's best for Boise State. I don't think there's any way Hair Thompson makes it uniform across the board.
I like the idea Boise being a country within a country .....similar to the Hamas in Palestine.  biggrin
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/2/2014 9:26 PM

Re: Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 



Fangdog wrote:
volklgirl wrote:
BroncoBob wrote:
volklgirl wrote: It'll be interesting to see what the conference decides to do moving forward. I heard Coach Bob Davie say at the media days that each school in the MW should offer the same benefits, make it equal across the board. Now we have Fresno saying the same thing. As a Bronco fan, it's a hard situation. I understand those school's positions but at the same time, Boise State can probably afford to offer above and beyond what the rest of the conference can. It's a dog-eat-dog world, survival of the fittest, college football.
Why hold all the MWC schools to the lowest benefits afforded by the school with the lowest athletic Budget.
Boise State just sold the naming rights to Bronco Stadium in part to help afford the additional costs of player benefits.
Yep exactly. I guess I sympathize with other schools' situations but at the end of the day, Boise State needs to do what's best for Boise State. I don't think there's any way Hair Thompson makes it uniform across the board.
I like the idea Boise being a country within a country .....similar to the Hamas in Palestine.  biggrin
I don't consider Fresno to be a "have not", more like a "have less". 
Does not Fresno have the highest paid head coach in the conference?

The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common.  They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit their views.

Nuff Said!

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/3/2014 12:24 AM

Re: Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 



sbbulldog85 wrote:
Fangdog wrote:
volklgirl wrote:
BroncoBob wrote:
volklgirl wrote: It'll be interesting to see what the conference decides to do moving forward. I heard Coach Bob Davie say at the media days that each school in the MW should offer the same benefits, make it equal across the board. Now we have Fresno saying the same thing. As a Bronco fan, it's a hard situation. I understand those school's positions but at the same time, Boise State can probably afford to offer above and beyond what the rest of the conference can. It's a dog-eat-dog world, survival of the fittest, college football.
Why hold all the MWC schools to the lowest benefits afforded by the school with the lowest athletic Budget.
Boise State just sold the naming rights to Bronco Stadium in part to help afford the additional costs of player benefits.
Yep exactly. I guess I sympathize with other schools' situations but at the end of the day, Boise State needs to do what's best for Boise State. I don't think there's any way Hair Thompson makes it uniform across the board.
I like the idea Boise being a country within a country .....similar to the Hamas in Palestine.  biggrin
I don't consider Fresno to be a "have not", more like a "have less". 
Does not Fresno have the highest paid head coach in the conference?
I agree, I don't see Fresno being a "have not" as much as I see Fresno steppin on their dick with dick-heads. They talk about all the poverty in the San Joaquin Valley, but they fail to recognize all the wealth and its a bunch. It is just the wealthy in this Valley are winners and they don't identify themselves with losers which is what Fresno State football and basketball has been for too long. 

I know a lot of rich people in this Valley and Fresno State football or basketball is not something they necessarily identify themselves. I am confident DeRuyter and Castro will change the perception over time. Sweeney did it at one time and DeRuyter is the next hope of that magnitude. The potential is definitely not one of "have not". It is squandered potential which results in the "have not".
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/3/2014 9:03 AM

Re: Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 



Fangdog wrote:
I agree, I don't see Fresno being a "have not" as much as I see Fresno steppin on their dick with dick-heads. They talk about all the poverty in the San Joaquin Valley, but they fail to recognize all the wealth and its a bunch. It is just the wealthy in this Valley are winners and they don't identify themselves with losers which is what Fresno State football and basketball has been for too long. 

I know a lot of rich people in this Valley and Fresno State football or basketball is not something they necessarily identify themselves. I am confident DeRuyter and Castro will change the perception over time. Sweeney did it at one time and DeRuyter is the next hope of that magnitude. The potential is definitely not one of "have not". It is squandered potential which results in the "have not".

I use sports analogies a lot and when I hire people, I say something right along these lines. What I tell them is this:

"I am a big fan of Fresno State, but this company is NOT Fresno State. We are more like Alabama here. At Fresno State, 9-3 will get you a raise and a contract extension. At Alabama, 9-3 will get you fired. We have a high level of expectation and what most other companies consider a target goal, we consider the minimum standard of performance. We are not satisfied with hiring just winners, we want champions. If you can rise to that level, you will do well here. If you cannot, you will eventually be replaced by somebody who can."

That said, I do not consider Fresno State to be a loser team. They are winners, but just not at the top playoff/championship level. In the NFL, there are plenty of teams each year with winning records that don't make the playoffs. That is a good place for winners, but not a good place for champions.

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/3/2014 9:10 AM

Re: Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 



MrPoindexter wrote:
Fangdog wrote:
I agree, I don't see Fresno being a "have not" as much as I see Fresno steppin on their dick with dick-heads. They talk about all the poverty in the San Joaquin Valley, but they fail to recognize all the wealth and its a bunch. It is just the wealthy in this Valley are winners and they don't identify themselves with losers which is what Fresno State football and basketball has been for too long. 

I know a lot of rich people in this Valley and Fresno State football or basketball is not something they necessarily identify themselves. I am confident DeRuyter and Castro will change the perception over time. Sweeney did it at one time and DeRuyter is the next hope of that magnitude. The potential is definitely not one of "have not". It is squandered potential which results in the "have not".

I use sports analogies a lot and when I hire people, I say something right along these lines. What I tell them is this:

"I am a big fan of Fresno State, but this company is NOT Fresno State. We are more like Alabama here. At Fresno State, 9-3 will get you a raise and a contract extension. At Alabama, 9-3 will get you fired. We have a high level of expectation and what most other companies consider a target goal, we consider the minimum standard of performance. We are not satisfied with hiring just winners, we want champions. If you can rise to that level, you will do well here. If you cannot, you will eventually be replaced by somebody who can."

That said, I do not consider Fresno State to be a loser team. They are winners, but just not at the top playoff/championship level. In the NFL, there are plenty of teams each year with winning records that don't make the playoffs. That is a good place for winners, but not a good place for champions.

I agree Fresno is not a loser team NOW.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/3/2014 3:39 PM

Re: Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 


Fresno is OK now, with a middle sized budget, ahead of small budget schools SJSU, USU, Nevada, and Hawaii (the Warriors are in big financial trouble). UNLV's budget is the largest in the MWC, but it looks very wrong, with well over $50m a year subsidy and things like $4m spend on recruiting Basketball (nobody else spends even $1m), and some other out of place looking line items in their budget. Something smells very fishy in the UNLV numbers, it doesn't match the product. Air Force also cannot be evaluated with the others due to the nature of the academy. But Fresno State is clearly behind New Mexico, Colorado State, Wyoming, San Diego State, and the very well run Boise State program (my hats off the tight ship at Boise, they spend $43m a year and are 80% self funded, by far the best in the conference and all of the G5 -- in a P5 conference they could up the budget to $55m and be profitable).

While I think Fresno State is OK for now, and they have a decent sized endowment built up (2nd largest in the CSU system behind SDSU), the long term picture is extremely grim. They have drifted down to a point where only the minimal budget schools are below them. The local economy is awful, and academically they are in the lower half of the CSU system, which is being starved. There has been a slow steady decline in the San Joaquin Valley which has been accelerated by the drought - lack of California investment in water resources has dramatically harmed agriculture, the life blood of the Valley.

The problems are not Fresno's alone. California ranks 50th in business climate, 44th in employment, 1st in welfare (11.5% of the US population, almost 40% of the welfare recipients), 1st in poverty (24% live below the poverty line), 1st in taxes (income, also highest gas tax, and one of the highest sales taxes). A shocking fact is over half the tax receipts collected come from the 5m people in the region called Silicon Valley, the rest of the State's 38m, including Hollywood, paid the other half. Fresno is in one of the poorer regions of the state now.

Another thing working against Fresno is the establishment of UC Merced. As that campus builds up to an eventual 20-25,000 size, it will almost certainly draw away Valley resources from Fresno. But at the moment Fresno has a nice $175m endowment, and an established name and presence. What they need is a new Governor who will shift focus to water resources, job creation, and higher education reform that might free certain of the CSU schools from the current charter and allow them to become residential, establish selective admission standards (say top 20% of students only), and focus more on STEM. Cal Poly is the only one which has that higher level. San Diego State has begun the movement that direction, held back only by the State; San Jose State is sitting on Silicon Valley and could literally tap into the local $Billions with a more selective admission program. There are other schools that could benefit. And the pool of students are there. California has 8 of the 10 most applied to Universities, even though none have even 30,000 undergraduates. This results in California sending an astounding number of students out of state for residential schools, a higher percentage than even Illinois. (I did a BOE and came up with an annual transfer of $2B in college student spending going out of state as a result of the severe impaction, and the small number of STEM slots in the UC system - its still mostly a very Liberal Arts focused system).

Long winded. But Fresno State is looking at negative trend lines, and saddled with a CSU charter that does not allow it to escape them. Being more isolated than other schools from the necessary funding sources, they need that charter freedom quickly before their built up resources begin to evaporate.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/3/2014 4:41 PM

Re: Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 



sgwau96 wrote: Fresno is OK now, with a middle sized budget, ahead of small budget schools SJSU, USU, Nevada, and Hawaii (the Warriors are in big financial trouble). UNLV's budget is the largest in the MWC, but it looks very wrong, with well over $50m a year subsidy and things like $4m spend on recruiting Basketball (nobody else spends even $1m), and some other out of place looking line items in their budget. Something smells very fishy in the UNLV numbers, it doesn't match the product. Air Force also cannot be evaluated with the others due to the nature of the academy. But Fresno State is clearly behind New Mexico, Colorado State, Wyoming, San Diego State, and the very well run Boise State program (my hats off the tight ship at Boise, they spend $43m a year and are 80% self funded, by far the best in the conference and all of the G5 -- in a P5 conference they could up the budget to $55m and be profitable).

While I think Fresno State is OK for now, and they have a decent sized endowment built up (2nd largest in the CSU system behind SDSU), the long term picture is extremely grim. They have drifted down to a point where only the minimal budget schools are below them. The local economy is awful, and academically they are in the lower half of the CSU system, which is being starved. There has been a slow steady decline in the San Joaquin Valley which has been accelerated by the drought - lack of California investment in water resources has dramatically harmed agriculture, the life blood of the Valley.

The problems are not Fresno's alone. California ranks 50th in business climate, 44th in employment, 1st in welfare (11.5% of the US population, almost 40% of the welfare recipients), 1st in poverty (24% live below the poverty line), 1st in taxes (income, also highest gas tax, and one of the highest sales taxes). A shocking fact is over half the tax receipts collected come from the 5m people in the region called Silicon Valley, the rest of the State's 38m, including Hollywood, paid the other half. Fresno is in one of the poorer regions of the state now.

Another thing working against Fresno is the establishment of UC Merced. As that campus builds up to an eventual 20-25,000 size, it will almost certainly draw away Valley resources from Fresno. But at the moment Fresno has a nice $175m endowment, and an established name and presence. What they need is a new Governor who will shift focus to water resources, job creation, and higher education reform that might free certain of the CSU schools from the current charter and allow them to become residential, establish selective admission standards (say top 20% of students only), and focus more on STEM. Cal Poly is the only one which has that higher level. San Diego State has begun the movement that direction, held back only by the State; San Jose State is sitting on Silicon Valley and could literally tap into the local $Billions with a more selective admission program. There are other schools that could benefit. And the pool of students are there. California has 8 of the 10 most applied to Universities, even though none have even 30,000 undergraduates. This results in California sending an astounding number of students out of state for residential schools, a higher percentage than even Illinois. (I did a BOE and came up with an annual transfer of $2B in college student spending going out of state as a result of the severe impaction, and the small number of STEM slots in the UC system - its still mostly a very Liberal Arts focused system).

Long winded. But Fresno State is looking at negative trend lines, and saddled with a CSU charter that does not allow it to escape them. Being more isolated than other schools from the necessary funding sources, they need that charter freedom quickly before their built up resources begin to evaporate.
Overall for Fresno State University a negative trend line. However, is it necessary for the Athletic program particularly football and basketball? The Fresno AD has mentioned in the past these programs are going require more community self-funding. It isn't necessary for Fresno football and basketball to go down with the ship, but it is going to require leadership recognizing Fresno State has to have a winning product and not the mediocrity previously shoved down the throats of Valley fans by the previous regime.  

Boise recognized the value a strong athletic program especially football has for the University as a whole and not thinking it had to be the other way around. There is a difference between how an academic sees things as opposed to how a visionary sees things. Boise and Fresno are perfect examples for illustrating the difference. It is practically black and white in terms of results.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/4/2014 10:36 AM

Re: Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 


I addressed this before.  California with a 2 trillion dollar GDP has one of the largest economies in the world, probably in the top 10 in the world among natioins.  California has to retool their allocations of resources, funding before they go bankrupt.  Fresno is one of a handful of remaining state schools with football and other expensive programs to pay for.  many california schools have dropped football and other activities because they could no longer justify the expense of having them.  I would like to see Fresno try to hang on to their athletic programs, but if they cant they cant.

The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common.  They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit their views.

Nuff Said!

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/4/2014 10:55 AM

Re: Could Fresno State be an MW "have-not"? 



sbbulldog85 wrote: I addressed this before.  California with a 2 trillion dollar GDP has one of the largest economies in the world, probably in the top 10 in the world among natioins.  California has to retool their allocations of resources, funding before they go bankrupt.  Fresno is one of a handful of remaining state schools with football and other expensive programs to pay for.  many california schools have dropped football and other activities because they could no longer justify the expense of having them.  I would like to see Fresno try to hang on to their athletic programs, but if they cant they cant.
Despite California having one of the top 10 nation GDP's it is one of the most incompetent governing bodies in the world. It is not going to get better as long as the populace keep voting into office those who who implement handouts and entitlements. California has to go bankrupt before there is any real reform. It is not if, but when. 

Fresno State football has to become a world of its own if it is going to be competitive. Title-9 being strictly enforced by Fresno State make it virtually impossible. Is Fresno State football a hope, a wish and a prayer? Or is Fresno State football merely in the vestiges of the inevitable? 

As you point out, it has happened to others and has happened before. It is not as there hasn't been precedent.

Last edited 8/5/2014 6:35 AM by Fangdog

Reply | Quote