$5 million to bring back football at WSU!

[Kung Wu]

Why did the KSN piece only talk to one alumnus and one former player?

Because it's KSN

[RoyalShock]

Suellentrop's take:

http://blogs.kansas.com/shockwaves/2011/06/17/were-all-suckers-for-shocker-football/

[The Mad Hatter]

Suellentrop's take:

http://blogs.kansas.com/shockwaves/2...cker-football/

What Paul says doesn't cover all of this issues, but I think he does very well covering a lot of the way I feel about this issue.

[_kai_]

A really good article from Paul. He posts some good questions and scenarios, and his writing was nice. I'd hate for a football program to hinder the greatness that is all the other Shocker sports combined. That would be awful.

[shock]

spent**

[ShockTalk]

Suellentrop's take:

http://blogs.kansas.com/shockwaves/2...cker-football/

What Paul says doesn't cover all of this issues, but I think he does very well covering a lot of the way I feel about this issue.

Balanced, well thought article in which he doesn't really take a position, but you know what he's thinking and feeling.

[Shockerman]

While there were no winners in this ksn series, the clear loser was Beggs. I disagree with Beggs on shocker football but he has done a great job during his tenure at wsu. In this series he came across as a hardened old man that wanted these crazy football kids to get off his lawn. It is clear at this point that shocker football is in the deep freeze as long as he is still president. I will be thankful when he has retired but will always be grateful for the job he has done at wsu.

[The Mad Hatter]

While there were no winners in this ksn series, the clear loser was Beggs. I disagree with Beggs on shocker football but he has done a great job during his tenure at wsu. In this series he came across as a hardened old man that wanted these crazy football kids to get off his lawn. It is clear at this point that shocker football is in the deep freeze as long as he is still president. I will be thankful when he has retired but will always be grateful for the job he has done at wsu.

I think the exact opposite is true, and I'm not alone. As Sully noted in his blog:

Football proponents make a big mistake every time they attack Beggs. Every booster with good sense, every coach and every athletic department official worships the guy. He is supportive of athletics and a big reason Koch Arena exists. The football proponents, well-intentioned as they are, alienate moderate fans when they make Beggs into the bad guy.

Read more: http://blogs.kansas.com/shockwaves/2...#ixzz1PbK2mTVV

While I appreciate you noting your thanks for Beggs as a president, I think that your interpretation of how Beggs comes across on this issue is still slanted by being in the strongly pro-football camp. What comes across as "hardened old man" to those in the pro-football camp can very easily come across as the voice of experience and reason to many others.

[Kung Wu]

While there were no winners in this ksn series, the clear loser was Beggs. I disagree with Beggs on shocker football but he has done a great job during his tenure at wsu. In this series he came across as a hardened old man that wanted these crazy football kids to get off his lawn. It is clear at this point that shocker football is in the deep freeze as long as he is still president. I will be thankful when he has retired but will always be grateful for the job he has done at wsu.

I think the exact opposite is true, and I'm not alone. As Sully noted in his blog:

Football proponents make a big mistake every time they attack Beggs. Every booster with good sense, every coach and every athletic department official worships the guy. He is supportive of athletics and a big reason Koch Arena exists. The football proponents, well-intentioned as they are, alienate moderate fans when they make Beggs into the bad guy.

Read more: http://blogs.kansas.com/shockwaves/2...#ixzz1PbK2mTVV

While I appreciate you noting your thanks for Beggs as a president, I think that your interpretation of how Beggs comes across on this issue is still slanted by being in the strongly pro-football camp. What comes across as "hardened old man" to those in the pro-football camp can very easily come across as the voice of experience and reason to many others.

:good: :yes:

[Veritas]

Suellentrop's take:

http://blogs.kansas.com/shockwaves/2...cker-football/

What Paul says doesn't cover all of this issues, but I think he does very well covering a lot of the way I feel about this issue.

Balanced, well thought article in which he doesn't really take a position, but you know what he's thinking and feeling.

Is Suellentrop a WSU alumn? As much as I respect his coverage of WSU athletics, I don't believe he has a true connection to WSU except that it is simply his job. A job which he does very well. Maybe that's a good thing though as it takes out any subjective analysis.

I think his article is well balanced, except for the continued decrease in enrollment which I believe is based on WSU losing its identity as a traditional school when it had football to one which now focuses on commuters and international students.
Additionally, I don't think WSU's other athletic programs have flourished since '86. Like most schools, it has gone through a cycle of success. I also believe HLA would have indeed been renovated with or without football and most of that credit goes to Koch; not Beggs or ADES.

One thing is certain... When late summer and autumn roll around, most Shocker fans are focused on other schools and their football programs.

[ABC]

Sullentrop's blog wa a tour de force with all of the right issues discussed.

Some might think lack of football equals enrollment decrease, but there isn't any proof. None.

As Sullentrop notes, WSU's peak enrollment was in 1989, three years after football was dropped.

One thing that Sully might have missed is what conference would WSU be in had they not dropped football?

I think the Mountain West is a possibility.

[shocker3]

Sullentrop's blog wa a tour de force with all of the right issues discussed.

Some might think lack of football equals enrollment decrease, but there isn't any proof. None.

As Sullentrop notes, WSU's peak enrollment was in 1989, three years after football was dropped.

One thing that Sully might have missed is what conference would WSU be in had they not dropped football?

I think the Mountain West is a possibility.

The Mountain West would be a nice conference to be in.

[Veritas]

Sullentrop's blog wa a tour de force with all of the right issues discussed.

Some might think lack of football equals enrollment decrease, but there isn't any proof. None.

As Sullentrop notes, WSU's peak enrollment was in 1989, three years after football was dropped.

One thing that Sully might have missed is what conference would WSU be in had they not dropped football?

I think the Mountain West is a possibility.

Not sure you're on target with the enrollment issue...
If it peaked in '89, some of that enrollment was a carry-over from the football years. Additionally, student fees might have dropped which caused a temporary gain in transfer students from BUCO. Then of course the bottom dropped out as expected as the school's identity changed tremendously.
Take a look at the trend from the past 50 years. I suspect losing the program had something to do with the drop in enrollment.

[TNMSUFAN]

Anyone hearing any talk of you guys getting contacted by CUSA...I have heard some things from very reliable people and surprised there isn't any talk on your board about it. The timing of the football talk is interesting though...

[AndShock]

Anyone hearing any talk of you guys getting contacted by CUSA...I have heard some things from very reliable people and surprised there isn't any talk on your board about it. The timing of the football talk is interesting though...

Toying with us isn't very nice... :whistle: