|
Post by hc87 on Dec 8, 2016 23:46:16 GMT -5
Have things really changed that much? Football still stinks...Pine extended Gilmore's contract. Hoop is losing to hockey schools. Hockey is still in limbo vis a vis Hockey East... Our Olympic sports in general still stink... This guy is saving HC sports? How exactly?
|
|
|
Post by A Clock Tower Purple on Dec 9, 2016 0:01:39 GMT -5
87 - go to bed. Please.
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Dec 9, 2016 0:31:39 GMT -5
And we are bettah undah Pine now how? Then I'll go to bed.
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Dec 9, 2016 1:08:24 GMT -5
ACTP- The Board needs contrary thinking. In fact, it's needed everywhere. Why don't you answer 87's question?
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Dec 9, 2016 8:01:24 GMT -5
Aside from HC87 being anchored to the decade when he matriculated, and he will be forever dis-satisfied given the prism by which he measures, let me suggest that it is too early to evaluate ADNP if one is using a W-L percentage on the playing fields metric.
In the thread on the class of 2020 in an other sub-forum, I gave values for the amount of financial aid that HC awarded athletes for the past six years. On the old board, I explained HC's budgeting cycle.
The 2013-14 HC budget for athletics was a DR budget. HC spent $8.4M on financial aid for athletes
The 2014-15 budget was essentially also a DR budget (even though he was long gone). HC spent $8.8M The 2015-16 budget was a NP budget. HC spent $9.7M The current 2016-17 budget is a NP budget, HC is spending $11.2M on financial aid for athletes.
At $60,000 per, HC is funding about 185 full scollie equivalents this year. There is no public information on whether in 2017-18, the number of equivalents will be 185, 192, or 200. (Schools typically ramp up scollies, e.g., if HC were to award scollies in swimming, with a goal of eight scollie equivalents, it would add two scollies a year until it reached the eight scollies.) But clearly, HC is increasing the number of scollies, and, these days, I am a firm believer that success on the playing field largely depends on the number of scollies rostered on a team. For that reason, I believe that an evaluation of ADNP based on assessing W-L percentage for most sports is a year or two away. _____________________ Only a few schools to date have released the CDS for 2016-17, but Richmond is one. Richmond is spending $10.4M on financial aid to athletes in 2016-17, and spent $9.8M in 2013-14. Most/all of the increase reflects the rise in the cost of attendance.
In 2016-17, Lafayette is spending about $2 million less on scollies than HC. ____________________
And it should be clear that TPTB at HC prioritize participation rates. The Luth Athletic Complex was designed (re-designed by ADNP) to provide nearly every sport that competes on campus with its own dedicated locker room.
And for the several sports that play on-campus and do not yet have a dedicated locker room, their building is coming. Sooner rather than later.
If HC was interested in concentrating resources on fewer sports, it wouldn't have done the above. HC crossed the Rubicon twice when it came to women's ice hockey. HC could have reduced the sport to club level to avoid a potential Title IX facilities issue (see softball), and it didn't. The second crossing was in deciding to award merit scollies for women's ice hockey. Even Notre Dame, whose athletic department prints money, chose not to pay the cost of fielding a women's ice hockey team.
|
|
|
Post by gks on Dec 9, 2016 8:35:54 GMT -5
HC athletics was so far behind modern times. Probably take 10 years to catch up. Still think the bigger problem is in pay-grades above Nate Pine.
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Dec 9, 2016 8:55:48 GMT -5
HC athletics was so far behind modern times. Probably take 10 years to catch up. Still think the bigger problem is in pay-grades above Nate Pine. Of this, I don't argue.
|
|
|
Post by ncaam on Dec 9, 2016 12:49:35 GMT -5
Nate Pine gets 10 years to right the ship? Very generous. Hope my boss is as generous. Doesn't hurt to benchmark his progress, nonetheless. How many winning programs this fall and the present time thus far in Winter sports?
|
|
|
Post by A Clock Tower Purple on Dec 9, 2016 13:23:28 GMT -5
Nate Pine gets 10 years to right the ship? Very generous. Hope my boss is as generous. Doesn't hurt to benchmark his progress, nonetheless. How many winning programs this fall and the present time thus far in Winter sports? You wanted to give MB SIX YEARS as the man responsible for the success (or lack thereof) of ONE sport.
|
|
|
Post by purplehaze on Dec 9, 2016 14:06:41 GMT -5
I have to agree with the tone of this thread. nate has to be disappointed with the lack of progress in our teams. as was the case when he arrived, we have only two men's teams that have a realistic shot (year in and year out) at a conference championship, in hockey and baseball. don't tell me basketball does (last march was a freak occurrence). for the women, there's not a team (playing d.1) that has had a sniff at a title in a long time.
overall, an embarrassing state of affairs. this new luth complex had better attract better athletes, and soon !
|
|
|
Post by zambonihomie13 on Dec 9, 2016 14:48:22 GMT -5
What is the expectation here? Seems unfair to judge an AD based on winning percentage when each sport hasn't had a full 4 years of recruits matriculate. There have been noticeable changes in marketing, promotion, and commitment to athletics. It clearly has become a priority for the first time in what, 30 years? Would we really be happier if athletics was still an afterthought and our facilities lagged behind NESCAC school but the men's or women's soccer team had won the PL title?
Should Nate Pine be out there recruiting the athletes himself? Teaching the field hockey players the proper stick technique during the week? I think people on this board have a hard time grasping what the role of an AD is, and in general have a hard time seeing the bigger picture of college athletics (i.e. "We would basically be Notre Dame if we only recruited football players from the catholic schools in MA."). We will never, ever, ever be an athletic powerhouse. We are a tiny school, in a rigid climate, with rigorous academic standards, with very little history of success in most sports, competing regularly against some of the most prestigious schools in the world who have significantly more resources, or similar resources that are allocated to focus on winning in certain sports and not others. However, we continue to churn out student-athletes who go on to do great things outside of sports. That will always, and should always, be the focus of our athletic department.
If, in a couple years, all the coaches that ADNP has hired turn out to be horrendous and the Luth Athletic Center becomes a waste of money and space, then the cries that ADNP is a failure and the sky is falling would be more appropriate. Until then, lets temper expectations for our tiny college on a hill.
P.S. To call our basketball championship a fluke is an insult to the players and coaches who worked hard to make it happen. To think that a basketball team wouldn't struggle to learn a new system under a new coach only to gel by season's end is ridiculous. Was there luck? Sure, such as RC's shot. But show me a championship team that didn't have a stroke of luck go its way.
|
|
|
Post by A Clock Tower Purple on Dec 9, 2016 14:54:09 GMT -5
Excellent post ZH.
|
|
|
Post by CHC8485 on Dec 10, 2016 9:54:42 GMT -5
So, the if the AD is responsible for the overall performance of the athletic department look at results in the whole department, not just in a couple of sports you care about ... Just looking at Fall Sports' and to compare apples to apples, here are the records in PL competition (or finishing place in the case of cross country) and comparing 2013 (Fall before ADNP was hired) and this year ... Sport
| 2013
| 2016
| Change | Mens Cross Country | 7th | 7th | Flat | Women's Cross Country | 7th | 3rd | Improved | Field Hockey | 1 - 5 | 3 - 3 | Improved | Football | 1 - 5 | 2 - 4 | Flat to Improved | Mens Soccer | 6 - 3 - 0 | 1 - 5 - 3 | Worse | Womens Soccer | 2 - 7 | 2 - 5 - 2 | Flat to Improved | Volleyball | 2 - 14 | 6 - 10 | Improved |
So, 1 worse, 2 flat and 4 improved. Also - 2 PL scholar atheles of the year in thier sport - FB & Women's XC. And for reference, here's the last time, prior to this year, that HC had a PL Schloar Athlete of the Year in each of the above sports Mens XC - Never Womens XC - Never Football - 2008 Field Hockey - 1998 Men's Soccer - 2002 Women's Soccer - 1996 Volleyball - 2006 Now make your judgement if things have improved.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Dec 10, 2016 9:59:20 GMT -5
Nicely done. One other thing I was thinking about--did Nate Pine have anything to do with the new Luth Athletic Complex--you know, some involvement with getting the project approved, raising the funds, developing the plans, overseeing construction--that sort of thing--or was he just along for the ride???
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Dec 10, 2016 10:24:16 GMT -5
Just checked the 2012-2013 hoops PL record 4-12 1st round PLT loss 2015-16 5-13, but of course, PLC
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Dec 10, 2016 10:28:19 GMT -5
Just checked the 2012-2013 hoops PL record 4-10 1st round PLT loss if the comparison is to the 2013-2014 season 12-6 semi final loss 2015-16 5-13, but of course, PLC
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Dec 10, 2016 11:14:44 GMT -5
Thank God for volleyball......
|
|
|
Post by CHC8485 on Dec 10, 2016 12:42:43 GMT -5
Look, if you're going to be myopic and only care about football and basketball and measure success or failure of the AD by them, then just say that and proclaim the great job the AD did from 2000 - 2009.
The ADs job, however, is bigger than that. And I don't think anyone hailed Nate Pine as a savior, but that the hiring represented a recognition that the PTB were opening the windows to allow some fresh air into the athletics department and investing in athletics by hiring a professional athletics administrator to manage that investment.
How well he manages what he's been entrusted with, remains to be seen, as it takes more than 2.5 years to overcome 25+ years of neglect - benign or otherwise.
You asked if things have changed that much. I and others have presented facts that indicate many things in athletics are moving in the right direction. Still not great performance, but changed and moving in the right direction. The fact you choose to belittle the progress made because it hasn't yet shown in the regular season performance of the teams you care most about doesn't change the fact that progress has been made in improving athletics at HC.
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Dec 10, 2016 15:35:16 GMT -5
Largest Single Factor in AD Evaluation: Hiring/Firing Head Coaches. You can forget everything else.
|
|
|
Post by A Clock Tower Purple on Dec 10, 2016 16:37:53 GMT -5
Largest Single Factor in AD Evaluation: Hiring/Firing Head Coaches. You can forget everything else. You can forget everything else 'sota. Most others will not.
|
|
|
Post by ncaam on Dec 10, 2016 18:31:26 GMT -5
How about the dumb idea of giving Togo bobbleheads to all who attended UMass at DCU. I got mine and brought it home. The building was littered with bobble heads thrown away by UMass fans. A promotion more appropriate for tomorrow? Don't know but the UMass game was the wrong time. Dumb, dumb, dumb.
btw it's not hiring and firing; it's winning. But of course raising $$$ is most important. If Nate raised $50M on his own, he should get a raise and an extension poor athletic field performance notwithstanding.
|
|
|
Post by A Clock Tower Purple on Dec 10, 2016 18:37:43 GMT -5
How about the dumb idea of giving Togo bobbleheads to all who attended UMass at DCU. I got mine and brought it home. The building was littered with bobble heads thrown away by UMass fans. A promotion more appropriate for tomorrow? Don't know but the UMass game was the wrong time. Dumb, dumb, dumb. btw it's not hiring and firing; it's winning. News flash: NP or the AD ANY school isn't the one who gives the nod for giving out bobble heads at any game. That's the marketing dept., not the AD. That being said, I agree it would have been better to give out tomorrow, and was a miss by the marketing dept.
|
|
|
Post by ncaam on Dec 10, 2016 18:41:30 GMT -5
Nate Pine is IN CHARGE of the marketing department is he not? Did we expend those funds without his OK? Doubt it. Dumb, dumb, dumb. Heads should have rolled.
|
|
|
Post by hcgrad94 on Dec 10, 2016 18:42:08 GMT -5
How about the dumb idea of giving Togo bobbleheads to all who attended UMass at DCU. I got mine and brought it home. The building was littered with bobble heads thrown away by UMass fans. A promotion more appropriate for tomorrow? Don't know but the UMass game was the wrong time. Dumb, dumb, dumb. btw it's not hiring and firing; it's winning. But of course raising $$$ is most important. If Nate raised $50M on his own, he should get a raise and an extension poor athletic field performance notwithstanding. 70 - and so we are clear that is your name right? Would love to follow you around your work and point out your mistakes.
|
|
|
Post by A Clock Tower Purple on Dec 10, 2016 19:01:47 GMT -5
Nate Pine is IN CHARGE of the marketing department is he not? Did we expend those funds without his OK? Doubt it. Dumb, dumb, dumb. Heads should have rolled. No. Marketing falls under the watch of one of the associate AD's, and if you think NP gets involved with the likes of bobble head giveaways you have no clue. I will allow that a marketing dept w/o Worc ties and any knowledge of the market is learning the ropes.
|
|