|
Post by crusader12 on Dec 12, 2019 15:25:17 GMT -5
I doubt he's over his head. Getting quality athletes to Holy Cross will continue to handcuff athletics for as long as TPTB are in place. We will just continue to suck at everything and I don't see that changing anytime soon.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Dec 12, 2019 15:27:33 GMT -5
I think "running off" comes down to playing time; those that don't get that much might decide they have a shot to play more elsewhere (not necesarily D1) and decide to take advantage of that. Or even decide that giving the time and effort to be a good basketball player is not bearing fruit and give up the game and get on with the rest of their (academic and otherwise) life.. Nothing wrong with that unless there's something disingenuous about who Coach Nelson decides to give minutes to. There have been a lot of generalizations about this subject, but I'd like to make the question more black and white. Specifically, if a scholarship player wants to return - regardless of potential playing time - and is willing to do the work and has no attitude problems, is it OK for Coach Nelson to non-renew that player's scholarship if Nelson doesn't think that player is as good as available recruits?How about changing your question to “Is it OK for Nathan Davis to non-renew...” ?
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Dec 12, 2019 15:35:28 GMT -5
There have been a lot of generalizations about this subject, but I'd like to make the question more black and white. Specifically, if a scholarship player wants to return - regardless of potential playing time - and is willing to do the work and has no attitude problems, is it OK for Coach Nelson to non-renew that player's scholarship if Nelson doesn't think that player is as good as available recruits? How about changing your question to “Is it OK for Nathan Davis to non-renew...” ? Why would I do that? There has never been a discussion on that topic on the Bucknell board or anywhere else. In contrast, there has been a lot of talk about the subject in this thread, although few definitive answers. Anyway, Bucknell has a strict policy that scholarships cannot be non-renewed (except for serious behavior issues), so the issue is moot.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Dec 12, 2019 15:44:08 GMT -5
How about changing your question to “Is it OK for Nathan Davis to non-renew...” ? Why would I do that? There has never been a discussion on that topic on the Bucknell board or anywhere else. In contrast, there has been a lot of talk about the subject in this thread, although few definitive answers. Anyway, Bucknell has a strict policy that scholarships cannot be non-renewed (except for serious behavior issues), so the issue is moot. "serious behavior issues" such as missing 80% of your threes---yeah, we get it
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Dec 12, 2019 15:52:23 GMT -5
I think "running off" comes down to playing time; those that don't get that much might decide they have a shot to play more elsewhere (not necesarily D1) and decide to take advantage of that. Or even decide that giving the time and effort to be a good basketball player is not bearing fruit and give up the game and get on with the rest of their (academic and otherwise) life.. Nothing wrong with that unless there's something disingenuous about who Coach Nelson decides to give minutes to. There have been a lot of generalizations about this subject, but I'd like to make the question more black and white. Specifically, if a scholarship player wants to return - regardless of potential playing time - and is willing to do the work and has no attitude problems, is it OK for Coach Nelson to non-renew that player's scholarship if Nelson doesn't think that player is as good as available recruits?In my opinion it is not OK for any coach to not renew a kid under the described circumstances
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Dec 12, 2019 16:00:32 GMT -5
Get out of D1. THAT is the long range solution (as I've have laid out on another thread here.
|
|
|
Post by hcgrad94 on Dec 12, 2019 16:03:06 GMT -5
Trivia: name the last school to leave DI and move down?
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Dec 12, 2019 16:08:40 GMT -5
Trivia: name the last school to leave DI and move down? Savannah State?
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Dec 12, 2019 16:12:47 GMT -5
I doubt he's over his head. Getting quality athletes to Holy Cross will continue to handcuff athletics for as long as TPTB are in place. We will just continue to suck at everything and I don't see that changing anytime soon. Milan Brown was able to get the following guys to HC: -Malcolm Miller -- In the NBA -Jahaad Proctor -- Averaging 14.2 PPG for Purdue, a borderline Top 25 team right now -Jehyve Floyd -- Freak athlete, 2-time PL DPOY -Andrew Koestecka -- Averaging 20+ PPG for the second consecutive year at Loyola, will be a 2-time PL 1st team player, likely 3-time PL all-defensive team, and potentially POY this year And we can do a lot better than Milan Brown as our head coach -- I am hopeful that Nelson could be that guy.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Dec 12, 2019 16:16:38 GMT -5
Well, I am not sure how two players who never cane to HC count as "gets" for Brown. Floyd and Miller - certainly top HC recruits. Can we do still better...I agree we can.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Dec 12, 2019 16:25:01 GMT -5
I think "running off" comes down to playing time; those that don't get that much might decide they have a shot to play more elsewhere (not necesarily D1) and decide to take advantage of that. Or even decide that giving the time and effort to be a good basketball player is not bearing fruit and give up the game and get on with the rest of their (academic and otherwise) life.. Nothing wrong with that unless there's something disingenuous about who Coach Nelson decides to give minutes to. There have been a lot of generalizations about this subject, but I'd like to make the question more black and white. Specifically, if a scholarship player wants to return - regardless of potential playing time - and is willing to do the work and has no attitude problems, is it OK for Coach Nelson to non-renew that player's scholarship if Nelson doesn't think that player is as good as available recruits?Absolutely not, imo.
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Dec 12, 2019 16:27:18 GMT -5
Well, I am not sure how two players who never cane ti HC count as "gets" for Brown. Floyd and Miller - certainly top HC recruits. Can we do still better...I agree we can. They cleared the hurdles of (1) getting accepted to HC and (2) committing to HC -- two things that people have said can't happen with quality athletes. If we kept Milan around (not saying we should have), our team last year would have had Floyd, Proctor, and Koesteka. An empty chair could have coached a team with those three to a better pL finish than last place.
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Dec 12, 2019 16:27:43 GMT -5
I think "running off" comes down to playing time; those that don't get that much might decide they have a shot to play more elsewhere (not necesarily D1) and decide to take advantage of that. Or even decide that giving the time and effort to be a good basketball player is not bearing fruit and give up the game and get on with the rest of their (academic and otherwise) life.. Nothing wrong with that unless there's something disingenuous about who Coach Nelson decides to give minutes to. There have been a lot of generalizations about this subject, but I'd like to make the question more black and white. Specifically, if a scholarship player wants to return - regardless of potential playing time - and is willing to do the work and has no attitude problems, is it OK for Coach Nelson to non-renew that player's scholarship if Nelson doesn't think that player is as good as available recruits?Hopefully my answer was interpreted as being in the "no" category to your question, Bison. It was intended as such.
|
|
|
Post by hcgrad94 on Dec 12, 2019 16:35:41 GMT -5
Trivia: name the last school to leave DI and move down? Savannah State? Correct you are. Other recent one was Centenary (alma mater of Robert Parrish). My takeaway: no school we have anything in common with moves down. Ever. HC looked at that option in late 90s audit. Join NESCAC (if they'll have us/we are a Seminary after all), lose our unique nitch in the LAC market and play a game they have been playing for years? No thanks.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Dec 12, 2019 16:44:51 GMT -5
You don't have to run players off to succeed. BN will have the opportunity to recruit a full team over the length of his contract.
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Dec 12, 2019 16:46:51 GMT -5
Well, I am not sure how two players who never cane ti HC count as "gets" for Brown. Floyd and Miller - certainly top HC recruits. Can we do still better...I agree we can. They cleared the hurdles of (1) getting accepted to HC and (2) committing to HC -- two things that people have said can't happen with quality athletes. If we kept Milan around (not saying we should have), our team last year would have had Floyd, Proctor, and Koesteka. An empty chair could have coached a team with those three to a better pL finish than last place. I don't think Proctor would have played 4 years at HC, no matter who was head coach.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Dec 12, 2019 17:00:11 GMT -5
To how many schools did Proctor finally "commit"? Was it 3 or 4? ...and someone would actually think he would have stayed at HC for 4 years? Really? I would say no chance.
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Dec 12, 2019 18:07:36 GMT -5
Correct you are. Other recent one was Centenary (alma mater of Robert Parrish). My takeaway: no school we have anything in common with moves down. Ever. HC looked at that option in late 90s audit. Join NESCAC (if they'll have us/we are a Seminary after all), lose our unique nitch in the LAC market and play a game they have been playing for years? No thanks. IIRC, Lafayette looked at the same and determined that the decrease in alumni financial support and losing the Lehigh rivalry weren't worth the drop to D2 or D3. IMO, there's zero guarantee that HC would be competitive in the NESCAC or in any league at the D3 level. Maybe initially but long term, who knows? I imagine that if HC ever seriously considered the question again, the blowback from alumni would be similar to what Lafayette experienced.
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Dec 12, 2019 18:16:15 GMT -5
Trivia: name the last school to leave DI and move down? Savannah State? Savannah State is currently in its first year of DII. Winston-Salem State is another HBCU that moved up about 15 years ago only to drop back down. Birmingham-Southern is another as is Northeastern Illinois (dropped athletics altogether). Morris Brown also was DI in the early 2000's and either dropped athletics altogether or closed as a school. Im sure wikipedia has the answers.. And the aforementioned Centenary College of course. The University of New Orleans dropped from DI to DIII in the years following Katrina only to transition back up. They've been back for at least 5 years now.
|
|
|
Post by cfrivals on Dec 12, 2019 18:32:01 GMT -5
Sorry guys, but if any player can put his name in the transfer portal at any point and thus handcuffing a program (ala Green and Grandison) a coach should have have the right to putting out the Best team each season based on an assessment of talent and commitment. In life if you perform poorly or are unhappy, you eventually leave or are asked to leave. The pendulum has to swing both ways!
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Dec 12, 2019 19:17:36 GMT -5
The emergence of former D-2 schools like Sacred Heart, Bryant, Merrimack, and UMass Lowell in D-1, all within an easy bus ride from HC, provides us with a nearby group of opponents that mimic some of the geographic and cost reduction benefits we would get in D-3. When somebody calls out "Hey Big Spender" at a D-1 cocktail party I doubt any of those schools would turn around, so it gives us additional schools to play who we don't have to get into a spending race with to compete. We still have our traditional regional D-1 rivals and there's nothing stopping us from exploring synergies with D-1 members of the mythical "Papal Conference" that has been discussed.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Dec 12, 2019 19:47:11 GMT -5
Sorry guys, but if any player can put his name in the transfer portal at any point and thus handcuffing a program (ala Green and Grandison) a coach should have have the right to putting out the Best team each season based on an assessment of talent and commitment. In life if you perform poorly or are unhappy, you eventually leave or are asked to leave. The pendulum has to swing both ways! Green and Grandison's departure gives Coach Nelson a chance to hand select two of "his" recruits earlier than normal so I think the door swung both ways in this case. BN will have four full years with his two recruits instead of two years with two of Carmody's recruits from a last place team. Where the pendulum/door does not swing both ways is with the coach's contract. If the coach is asked to leave he still gets paid. That's why there is a certain cringe factor to the thought of a protected coach asking a vulnerable scholarship player to leave or "running him off." I think the burden should be on the coach to use his skills to motivate and develop the players the right way. Coach Nelson will get several years to build a winning team. It is very unlikely he will be run off by ADMB.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Dec 12, 2019 19:51:34 GMT -5
Savannah State is currently in its first year of DII. Winston-Salem State is another HBCU that moved up about 15 years ago only to drop back down. Birmingham-Southern is another as is Northeastern Illinois (dropped athletics altogether). Morris Brown also was DI in the early 2000's and either dropped athletics altogether or closed as a school. Im sure wikipedia has the answers.. And the aforementioned Centenary College of course. The University of New Orleans dropped from DI to DIII in the years following Katrina only to transition back up. They've been back for at least 5 years now. Morris Brown is an NAIA school now.
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Dec 12, 2019 21:59:57 GMT -5
HC is perhaps unique in the universe of college athletics......a very small religious liberal arts college that has won national championships in two major sports and a major bowl participant in a third major sport, but due to profound changes in college athletics and in Society in the last 60+ years, is finding it increasingly difficult to succeed in Div 1 athletics. The major causes are, first, the mushrooming number of colleges intent on upgrading their athletic programs thereby becoming competitive with HC, second, more selective admissions standards than most of HC's athletic opponents, and third, the growing secularity of US Society. The major resources HC has to solve this problem are a healthy size endowment per student, above average academic reputation, above average physical athletic facilities, and healthy alumni financial support. What are we getting for this obsession with Div 1? HC has no sports identity with the 17 yr olds in the U.S. who would apply to HC. There is no interest in HC sports among HC's students except in the varsity team a student happens to play on. There is no interest among the Worcester public as our empty arena/stadia attest. There is no perfect solution to this problem. And it's made doubly hard because college are held captive to a gargantuan monopoly called the NCAA that enforces cookie-cutter rules that make it impossible for colleges to solve their often unique problems. Then there is the annual $7 Million bribe we have to pay sports scholarship athletes to play at HC. I believe the goal of becoming successful in Div 1 is a chimera. The changes HC would have to make to achieve this goal have not been faced up to and if faced up to would not be supported by all HC's constituencies.....except one, the old alums like me who remember the glory sports days. Fortunately for HC we will die off. HC's current Div 1 program is like a tumor that will continue to drain resources away from more productive areas. It's throwing our whole institution out of balance.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Dec 12, 2019 22:59:06 GMT -5
HC is perhaps unique in the universe of college athletics......a very small religious liberal arts college that has won national championships in two major sports and a major bowl participant in a third major sport, but due to profound changes in college athletics and in Society in the last 60+ years, is finding it increasingly difficult to succeed in Div 1 athletics. The major causes are, first, the mushrooming number of colleges intent on upgrading their athletic programs thereby becoming competitive with HC, second, more selective admissions standards than most of HC's athletic opponents, and third, the growing secularity of US Society. The major resources HC has to solve this problem are a healthy size endowment per student, above average academic reputation, above average physical athletic facilities, and healthy alumni financial support. What are we getting for this obsession with Div 1? HC has no sports identity with the 17 yr olds in the U.S. who would apply to HC. There is no interest in HC sports among HC's students except in the varsity team a student happens to play on. There is no interest among the Worcester public as our empty arena/stadia attest. There is no perfect solution to this problem. And it's made doubly hard because college are held captive to a gargantuan monopoly called the NCAA that enforces cookie-cutter rules that make it impossible for colleges to solve their often unique problems. Then there is the annual $7 Million bribe we have to pay sports scholarship athletes to play at HC. I believe the goal of becoming successful in Div 1 is a chimera. The changes HC would have to make to achieve this goal have not been faced up to and if faced up to would not be supported by all HC's constituencies.....except one, the old alums like me who remember the glory sports days. Fortunately for HC we will die off. HC's current Div 1 program is like a tumor that will continue to drain resources away from more productive areas. It's throwing our whole institution out of balance. Thanks Sarasota. Well reasoned argument. I googled "Chimera" and learned a new vocabulary word. I think the D-1 participatory approach in the minor, mostly non-scholarship sports is working for HC because it is attracting students who are above average academicly and below average in financial need, as I understand from previous postings. Winning percentage needs upgrading but apparently the opportunity to participate in D-1 sports is quite a selling point. That leaves the revenue or spectator or scholarship or major sports, whichever term you want to use. With good coaching HC has shown it can win the PL or AHA, but we've had too many down years for sure. We just won the PL in football and WBB should be in the hunt for the PL crown. It's a start. If I had a vote I wouldn't vote for D-3. Merrimack just crunched the numbers and decided to go up to D-1, not down to D-3 so the financial burden can't be that huge. I can't define it that well other than to say I would like HC to be playing UMass on a regular basis going forward, not UMass-Boston.
|
|