|
Post by td128 on Mar 4, 2019 12:20:46 GMT -5
"If winning isn't important, then why do they keep score."
"Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser."
Whoever said, "It's not whether you win or lose that counts," probably lost.
LOSING SUCKS!!
LET'S WIN!!
I agree that coaches and players own the W-L records but that the AD, administration, and board also own the process that is inextricably linked to and yields the W-L results. Unless and until everybody involved in the process from the top down gets on the same page and embraces the importance of a true commitment to excellence in which winning is a byproduct, . . . well, you understand. Accepting mediocrity is a very unhealthy character trait for an individual, team, organization, and/or institution.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 4, 2019 12:44:27 GMT -5
No doubt within the game the coaches and players would rather win than lose.
But that is within an athletic structure set up as participatory D1. Again, we excel at participating in D1 sports, excel at staffing (for participation) in D1 sports, excel at apparel and equipment for participating, and excel at constructing the fields/courts necessary for participation in D1 sports. As others have noted, our participation rate is at the top of the PL, our graduation rates for participating athletes is outstanding, and our participating athletes go on to successful careers. So, we are a success (actually highly successful) within the participatory construct. Our construct.
By exception and here and there we may see a sport set up to win. Football seems to be one such exception (although the winning portion is a work in progress).
|
|
|
Post by gks on Mar 4, 2019 12:50:37 GMT -5
No doubt within the game the coaches and players would rather win than lose. But that is within an athletic structure set up as participatory D1. Again, we excel at participating in D1 sports, excel at staffing (for participation) in D1 sports, excel at apparel and equipment for participating, and excel at constructing the fields/courts necessary for participation in D1 sports. As others have noted, our participation rate is at the top of the PL, our graduation rates for participating athletes is outstanding, and our participating athletes go on to successful careers. So, we are a success (actually highly successful) within the participatory construct. Our construct. By exception and here and there we may see a sport set up to win. Football seems to be one such exception (although the winning portion in a work in progress). If I was an alum and I heard this was the mission statement of the athletic department I don't know if I'd laugh or cry harder.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Mar 4, 2019 12:53:28 GMT -5
It would seem it is time for another AD Little-type study of HC sports to find out and establish a strategic mission in this area. If the Cross' current strategy is to simply "participate" and to win championships by dumb luck, I will soon be giving up my season tickets in all sports. I hope in heaven's name that you guys are totally wrong but based on the results the last 10 years or so, I suspect you are onto something or how could we do so poorly other than by design? When the new permanent AD is finally named ('45 drop me an email if it is during my Crossports hiatus), I intend to fire off an email demanding some answers. And, yes, the timing is perfect for me to put HC sports in the closet for a bit . . . . . I'm getting annoyed at all this stuff.
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Mar 4, 2019 13:14:53 GMT -5
Holy Cross effectively ended any aspirations for national athletic success ( defined here by me as: making the NCAAs regularly in different sports, the FCS playoffs etc) when it joined the PL for all sports. To not "see" this is to have had blindahs on for 30+ years.
We morphed into the D1 participatory model partly to keep enrollment/admissions up and partly as a response to the NCAA "Dayton Rule" whereby all athletic programs have to play at the same divisional level.
No way out of this unless very systematic changes are made....which I have a very difficult time seeing us doing.
|
|
|
Post by CHC8485 on Mar 4, 2019 13:50:28 GMT -5
Wow. Got behind while looking stuff up on where Club & intramural sports is "owned." Here is a link to the Office of Student Involvement showing Recreational, Intramural and Club Sports www.holycross.edu/office-student-involvement/recreation-intramural-and-club-sportsAnd further, if you look up Mike Leavitt, the head of Recreational, Intramural and Club Sports in the campus directory, note the pepartment he is in. webapps.holycross.edu/cd/cdI'm sure there is a fair amount of overlap in facilities - at least until the new rec center is complete - scheduling and maybe some equipment, but Intramural & club sports is part of student involvement.
|
|
|
Post by hcgrad94 on Mar 4, 2019 14:19:00 GMT -5
It doesn't report to/fall under Athletics. The guy who runs it is named Mike and he works in Student Affairs.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Mar 4, 2019 23:04:36 GMT -5
When you think about it, being able to offer D-1 participation in the non revenue sports does give HC a certain niche in recruiting. If Tufts, Middlebury, Bates and HC are all recruiting a lacrosse or soccer player and the kid wants D-1 competition, we would have an edge where the other three schools might have beat us out on other criteria. But that is a fairly limited benefit and only on applicants who can't get in to the Ivies but can get into all the other schools mentioned.
To me, the argument we are highly successful consistently losing was well made, but I'm old school: You strive for excellence and in sports that is measured by the final score. Us (We?) New England HC fans are somewhat insulated from the agony of (HC) defeat because we have the thrill of (Patriots) victory. But where in the wide world of sports will we be when Brady retires in ten years?
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Mar 5, 2019 7:00:14 GMT -5
To me, you play to win within all the rules and ethical standards, or don't play at all.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 5, 2019 7:36:27 GMT -5
We morphed into the D1 participatory model partly to keep enrollment/admissions up and partly as a response to the NCAA "Dayton Rule" whereby all athletic programs have to play at the same divisional level. I think many folks miss the connection between luring kids to HC via an opportunity to participate in D1 sports and our efforts to keep up admissions/enrollment (and at a certain standard). In my own experience I have seen kids - who otherwise would never have heard of HC - consider attendance at HC for just such an opportunity. In quite a few cases we are talking full-payers (or nearly) and pretty smart kids.
So, by that additional standard (attracting solid students who otherwise would not consider HC ) the participatory D-1 model may be a success. Nothing to do with W-L.
(To a different point, when the academic kids see this via a schoolmate it does feed the perception of HC as a jock school...those that read the papers (or at least skim the news on the internet) and have heard of HC know it is a social justice school ..put it together and that explains the perception I see from the academic kids that HC is a jock/social justice school. Again, not necessarily a bad niche.)
|
|
|
Post by gks on Mar 5, 2019 7:38:42 GMT -5
We morphed into the D1 participatory model partly to keep enrollment/admissions up and partly as a response to the NCAA "Dayton Rule" whereby all athletic programs have to play at the same divisional level. I think many folks miss the connection between luring kids to HC via an opportunity to participate in D1 sports and our efforts to keep up admissions/enrollment (and at a certain standard). In my own experience I have seen kids - who otherwise would never have heard of HC - consider attendance at HC for just such an opportunity. In quite a few cases we are talking full-payers (or nearly) and pretty smart kids.
So, by that additional standard (attracting solid students who otherwise would not consider HC ) standard the participatory D-1 model may be a success. Nothing to do with W-L.
(To a different point, when the academic kids see this via a schoolmate it does feed the perception of HC as a jock school...those that read the papers (or at least skim the news on the internet) and have heard of HC know it is a social justice school ..put it together and that explains the perception I see from the academic kids that HC is a jock/social justice school. Again, not necessarily a bad niche.)
If HC has to use athletics to 'keep up admission/enrollment' what does that say about the college's academics?
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 5, 2019 8:31:19 GMT -5
I think many folks miss the connection between luring kids to HC via an opportunity to participate in D1 sports and our efforts to keep up admissions/enrollment (and at a certain standard). In my own experience I have seen kids - who otherwise would never have heard of HC - consider attendance at HC for just such an opportunity. In quite a few cases we are talking full-payers (or nearly) and pretty smart kids.
So, by that additional standard (attracting solid students who otherwise would not consider HC ) standard the participatory D-1 model may be a success. Nothing to do with W-L.
(To a different point, when the academic kids see this via a schoolmate it does feed the perception of HC as a jock school...those that read the papers (or at least skim the news on the internet) and have heard of HC know it is a social justice school ..put it together and that explains the perception I see from the academic kids that HC is a jock/social justice school. Again, not necessarily a bad niche.)
If HC has to use athletics to 'keep up admission/enrollment' what does that say about the college's academics? To some folks it might be counterintuitive that D1 participation might help "keep up admission/enrollment (at a certain standard)" but then you meet that pretty smart high school senior who wants to swim D1 and she tells you she only heard of HC via recruiting and it sort of makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Mar 5, 2019 9:13:02 GMT -5
I'm in the compete to win camp, but when you read the biographic sketches of the HC student atheletes, we do have a great bunch of kids representing Holy Cross in all the sports. I wouldn't want to see any of them lose the chance to participate, but would like to see HC succeed better than our overall record of the last many years. The next AD is a critical hire.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Mar 5, 2019 9:32:13 GMT -5
I started this assessment of HC spending by sport to see whether and where NP had changed the funding dynamic during his tenure. So I may as well put the results here, rather than start a separate thread.
By sport, I focussed on how much money was spent on a sport in 2011-12 and how much money was spent on that same sport in 2017-18. I then compared HC's spending by sport with the average of the spending by the two PL schools who spent the most on that sport.
A crude principle that I applied was that if HC spent 85 percent or more of what the top two school's spent, it would be competitive in that sport within the PL. That would put HC's spending in the top half of the ten PL schools for that sport. (Not all PL schools field teams in all the PL sports.) The two top schools plus the USMA and USNA comprise four of the five slots in the top half. (All the players on the service academy rosters are, in effect, full scollies so the equivalent spending is way up there. The service academies no longer prepare Title IX reports.)
Unless indicated, Boston U and Loyola not included in 2011-12
Baseball 2011 39 percent of the top two 2017 58 percent of the top two (Lafayette and Lehigh)
M basketball 2011 89 percent of the top two 2017 82 percent of the top two (BostU and Bucknell)
W basketball 2011 HC was in top two 2017 87 percent of top two (BostU and Lafayette)
M all track combined 2011 57 percent of top two 2017 43 percent of the top two (BostU and Lehigh. Lehigh is 43 percent of BostU, HC is 31 percent of BostU)
W all track combined 2011 89 percent of top two 2017 92 percent of top two (BostU and Bucknell)
Field hockey 2011 66 percent of top two 2017 66 percent of top two (BostU and Lafayette)
Football 2011 > 2017 (ranked by 2017-18 spending. Georgetown and Fordham omitted.) Lafayette $4.3M > $6.7M +$2.4M Colgate $4.7M > $6.2M +1.5M HC $3.9M > $6.1M +$2.2M Bucknell $3.1M > $5.9M +2.8M Lehigh $4.5M > $5.8M $1.3M
M Golf 2011 40 percent of top two 2017 27 percent of top two (Loyola and Colgate, BostU no team)
W Golf Only four PL teams, HC is a distant last in spending both years
M ice hockey 2011 HC $1.1N, Colgate $1.8M, BostU $2.9M 2017 HC $1.7M, Colgate $2.2M, BostU $3.5M
W ice hockey 2011 HC $0.6M, Colgate $1.3M, BostU $2.0M 2017 HC $0.9M, Colgate $1.9M, BostU $2.3M
M's lacrosse 2011 HC 39 percent of top two 2017 HC 44 percent of top two (Loyola and BostU)
W's lacrosse 2011 HC 57 percent of top two 2017 HC 62 percent of top two (Lafayette and Loyola)
M's rowing 2011 HC #1 2017 HC a very distant #2 to BostU.
W's rowing 2011 HC #2, 2017 HC 41 percent of top two (BostU & Bucknell. BostU at $2.3M, is far ahead of HC and Bucknell
M's soccer 2011 HC #2 2017 HC 76 percent of top two (BostU and Loyola)
W's soccer 2011 HC #2 2017 HC 41 percent of top two (BostU and Colgate)
Softball 2011 HC 57 percent of top two 2017 HC 60 percent of top two (BostU and Lehigh)
M's swimming 2011 10 percent of the top two 2017 19 percent of the top two (Bucknell and BostU)
W's swimming 2011 19 percent of top two 2017 30 percent of top two (Bucknell and Lehigh)
M's tennis 2011 16 percent of top two 2017 22 percent of top two (Lehigh and Colgate)
W's tennis 2011 22 percent of top two 2017 11 percent of top two (BostU and Lehigh, Lehigh is 41 percent of BostU)
Volleyball 2011 52 percent of top two 2017 68 percent of top two (AU and Loyola)
Expenses not allocated at any sport HC is #1 with spending in 2017-18 that is 225% of the average spent by the other seven PL schools (excluding USMA and USNA)
(Only sport that several other PL schools play that HC does not is wrestling AU, Bucknell, and Lehigh. BostU dropped on entering PL in lieu of starting M's lacrosse. Annual costs average $1.2M) _____________________________
For most sports, HC was treading water over these six years. BostonU and Loyola joining the league resulted in those two schools going to the top in spending for some sports.
Ice hockey aside, my guesstimate is that if HC increased spending by about $3 million above any increases that maintain parity with increases at other schools, it could pull itself into the top half of spending in almost all sports.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Mar 5, 2019 9:51:42 GMT -5
Very interesting analysis and I like the creative methodology. Look at the men versus women on track (does this include cross country?) --haven't our women had better results than the men of late? $$$ help.....
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Mar 5, 2019 10:04:02 GMT -5
Some of this data is surprising - Lafayette as a top-two spender in WBB jumps out. The investment hasn't yielded results for a program that's averaged 7 wins over the last four seasons.
Surprised that AU is not one of the top two spenders in field hockey.
|
|
evan
Freshman
Posts: 13
|
Post by evan on Mar 5, 2019 11:28:58 GMT -5
Thanks for the analysis PP. What is the source if the data, I would like to look at it in a bit more detail if freely publicly available.
|
|
|
Post by res on Mar 5, 2019 12:49:01 GMT -5
If GU were to leave the PL, then the league loses its auto qualifier for the FCS championship. Was it not Fordham threatening to leave that forced the rest of the league to reinstate scollies?Other schools, e.g., UNH supposedly, ultimately have little enthusiasm about PL football affiliation because of the AI. Yes, I wonder who they learned that strategy from.
|
|
|
Post by moose1970 on Mar 5, 2019 14:20:32 GMT -5
"If winning isn't important, then why do they keep score." "Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser." Whoever said, "It's not whether you win or lose that counts," probably lost.LOSING SUCKS!! LET'S WIN!!I agree that coaches and players own the W-L records but that the AD, administration, and board also own the process that is inextricably linked to and yields the W-L results. Unless and until everybody involved in the process from the top down gets on the same page and embraces the importance of a true commitment to excellence in which winning is a byproduct, . . . well, you understand. Accepting mediocrity is a very unhealthy character trait for an individual, team, organization, and/or institution. if winning is the "byproduct"* then what is the "product"? * by·prod·uct Dictionary result for byproduct /ˈbīˌprädəkt/Submit noun an incidental or secondary product made in the manufacture or synthesis of something else. "zinc is a byproduct of the glazing process" a secondary result, unintended but inevitably produced in doing or producing something else. "he saw poverty as the byproduct of colonial prosperity" synonyms: side effect, consequence, entailment, corollary, concomitant;
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Mar 5, 2019 16:01:06 GMT -5
If GU were to leave the PL, then the league loses its auto qualifier for the FCS championship. Was it not Fordham threatening to leave that forced the rest of the league to reinstate scollies?Other schools, e.g., UNH supposedly, ultimately have little enthusiasm about PL football affiliation because of the AI. Yes, I wonder who they learned that strategy from. I think it's been addressed above but had Fordham left, the AQ to the FCS playoffs would've remained intact. The minimum is 6 schools for an auto-bid conference. But yes, Fordham's approach is very similar to HC circa 1996 vis a vis basketball.
|
|
|
Post by td128 on Mar 5, 2019 18:43:19 GMT -5
The product is "commitment to excellence."
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on Mar 5, 2019 18:48:24 GMT -5
Another positive outcome of our participatory athletic program.
(When folks realize we are running a participatory athletics model at HC than many of our decisions (or non- decisions) make sense. Ditto for the realization that we are running a progressive/social justice model...many of our decisions make sense.)
If this is the case...and that's HC's call...no one should ever complain about wins and losses again. No one should complain about coaching. Maybe I'm old school...thought they kept score for a reason. We might not complain but we should never write a check again
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Mar 5, 2019 19:25:19 GMT -5
Thanks for the analysis PP. What is the source if the data, I would like to look at it in a bit more detail if freely publicly available. ope.ed.gov/athletics/#/customdata/searchSelect conference under criteria. Select Patriot League Select continue with all found. This will include Fordham and GU Select years (you want data from) I selected 2011 and 2017. The years are academic years, not calendar, e.g., 2011 is 2011-12 Select the category you want the data for. I chose expenses All sports. The file will be an Excel spreadsheet. .
|
|
evan
Freshman
Posts: 13
|
Post by evan on Mar 5, 2019 20:06:43 GMT -5
Thank you PP
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Mar 5, 2019 21:29:07 GMT -5
In spending not allocated to any sport, HC is passing out money like a drunken sailor. What does that category include?
|
|