|
Post by hcpride on Jun 24, 2023 9:46:53 GMT -5
The property that Villanova covets (contrary to the Commandment) is not Cabrini, but Rosemont. May be a good six iron distance from the football stadium. I heard that about 15 years ago (when Rosemont was all girls and struggling). Villanova was renting a dorm or two from them. I think the tiny school is still struggling and now coed.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 24, 2023 9:20:19 GMT -5
‘Nova’s various decisions by their trustees over the past 20 years have proven extremely successful - one has to be very impressed by this report - I wonder if they could build a bigger football stadium on the Cabrini property? They’re happy with the 12.5 K seat stadium they have but initial report/rumor was a relocation of their law school. That apparently isn’t happening. Perhaps additional room for the undergraduate population is part of the plan? The comprehensive article hints at that.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 24, 2023 9:15:59 GMT -5
]Having connected with 3 of the remaining players who graduated from my high school on LI, I had heard that a 4th player from that HS was going to be on the team but I see no Long Islanders among the 13. Please use your contacts to get a few of their top boys lax players to HC. I think their high school team could beat our college team so it would be greatly appreciated. 😊 How good was St Anthony’s boys lax this year? “ The team featured 25 seniors committed to playing college lacrosse, 19 of whom will be competing at the Division I level. ” www.newsday.com/amp/sports/high-school/boys-lacrosse/st-anthonys-boys-lacrosse-chsaa-state-title-ezz3z8zs
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 24, 2023 8:09:23 GMT -5
Winning a few PL games, a few OOC games, and being on the edge of making the PL playoffs (making the PL playoffs even more so) may constitute a satisfactory season for some.
On a positive note for Tyler, if he's looking to move to a stronger college baseball program there are many many options.👍
(As you note, the 'benefits' of having a younger team or seeing a frosh in the starting lineup are wildly overstated by a few crossporters. We saw that in hoops five or six years ago when a few folks thought frosh starters meant the frosh were really good.)
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 24, 2023 4:52:40 GMT -5
Looks like Cabrini University (formerly Cabrini College) may be purchased by nearby Villanova: “Villanova has tentative agreement to buy Cabrini University campus” www.inquirer.com/news/pennsylvania/villanova-to-buy-cabrini-university-close-20230623.html?outputType=ampApparently Cabrini has major cash and enrollment issues and nearby Villanova is doing well: Unlike many of the region’s smaller Catholic universities, Villanova’s undergraduate enrollment has been steady over the last five years. For the school year that just ended, Villanova, which has a 260-acre campus, had 6,752 full-time undergraduates.
When Moody’s Investors Service upgraded Villanova’s credit rating in February 2022 to Aa3 from A1, it noted that “capacity limitations constrain undergraduate growth prospects.” The acquisition of Cabrini’s nearby campus could solve that problem.
Moody’s also noted that Villanova had become significantly more selective, admitting 23% of applicants starting last fall compared to 49% in 2014. The percentage of admitted students who enrolled increased 32% from 22% over that same time period.
While Cabrini has lost money for 10 consecutive years through last June, Villanova has been consistently profitable on an operating basis. The value of Villanova’s endowment had increased to $1.16 billion as of May 31 of last year, up from $640 million five years earlier. Over the same period, the value of its total pool of investments rose to $1.4 billion from $736 million.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 23, 2023 6:16:08 GMT -5
If BC sweeps their non-conference (they should be favored in each - Northern Illinois, Holy Cross, UConn, and Army) and picks up 2 ACC wins (Virginia, Syracuse...?) Hafley's seat might cool down a bit. But he must go 4-0 OOC this year. We've got his attention - no 'trap game' in the offing.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 23, 2023 5:06:02 GMT -5
The author is very confident regarding BC’s offense: In the run game, the Eagles should deploy more schemes that attack outside, as they should be able to win the edge against Holy Cross’ inexperienced and light defensive line. Given their opponents’ scheme and personnel, BC should be able to establish the run relatively easily. Building off that, calling play-action passes with rollouts that attack the middle of the field with crossing routes should confuse the Crusaders’ defense and allow the Eagles’ superior speed and athletic ability to take over. Run-pass options should also be quite effective, as putting inexperienced defenders in conflict should create some big plays.
247sports.com/college/boston-college/Article/Boston-College-2023-Opponent-Previews-Holy-Cross-Week-2-211675325/
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 22, 2023 21:12:17 GMT -5
What Sophs should we look out for this year? Sam Slade is one I presume I know Joe Metzger didn't get playing time to speak of as a frosh but his track season (shot put) was an eye opener and I think I saw a post noting he was one of the strongest players on the football team
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 21, 2023 21:23:39 GMT -5
On this particular matter (race-based affirmative action in college admissions), Justice Thomas is quite clearly in the mainstream: Most Americans oppose race-based admissions programs, polls show. When these programs have appeared on the ballot, they have almost always lost, including in Arizona, California, Michigan and Washington State, which are hardly red states. www.nytimes.com/2023/06/21/briefing/affirmative-action-ruling-scotus.html
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 21, 2023 15:15:10 GMT -5
I wonder if President Rougeau regrets his Boston Globe Op-Ed or at least has reconsidered parts of it. Justice Thomas receives more than his share of condemnation and criticism from the left and this just smacked of piling on. A faux ‘gotcha’ that accomplished nothing. Let’s have some other progressive college president launch the next attack. Totally disagree. My guess whether he regrets it: not one word. I understand his circle may think the world of this sort of thing…but Dan McLaughlin is not alone in his distaste for this public OP-Ed by an HC president directed against our most prominent (and accomplished) alum…we’ll see.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 21, 2023 15:02:19 GMT -5
I wonder if President Rougeau regrets his Boston Globe Op-Ed or at least has reconsidered parts of it.
Justice Thomas receives more than his share of condemnation and criticism from the left and this just smacked of piling on. A faux ‘gotcha’ that accomplished nothing. Let’s have some other progressive college president launch the next attack.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 21, 2023 9:29:10 GMT -5
Logic and mathematics will tell you that if you're giving one demographic group an advantage you are necessarily discriminating against other groups. It seems a no brainer that favoring one racial group on account of their race in admissions would disadvantage another racial group on account of their race in admissions. Admissions is a zero sum game. It seems a no-brainer decision that discriminating against Asians on account of their race would be unlawful. I would expect the moderates and conservatives to join together on this one. And maybe even a liberal surprise. NYT today: Sometime in the next 10 days, the Supreme Court is expected to tightly restrict or ban race-based affirmative action in college admissions. The ruling could come as soon as tomorrow or as late as Friday, June 30, before the justices leave for their summer break.www.nytimes.com/2023/06/21/briefing/affirmative-action-ruling-scotus.html Given the damning relevant facts (and logic and mathematics) and our constitution I guess it is no surprise the progressive response is to either talk of Clarence Thomas or the benefits of diversity or the evils of white supremacy or the practice of legacy admissions or athletic scholarships. Or a goopy mélange of all of it at once. None of which matter in regards to the case-in-hand.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 21, 2023 8:21:51 GMT -5
It's nice to see this thread take a pause, and I'm not trying to re-energize it, but I do encourage everyone to read the Amici Curiae brief filed by HC and 55 other Catholic colleges with the Supreme Court on the pending case. 1. I think most folks are in favor of affirmative action in the sense of recruiting applicants of racially diverse backgrounds to apply to the college. Who could argue with that? It was always my understanding that Fr. Brooks engaged in this sort of affirmative action. 2. Affirmative action loses in the public eye when and where there are folks harmed or disadvantaged in the admission process because of their race. Asian students at Harvard in the case at hand. These two separate 'affirmative action' initiatives are frequently conflated (deliberately or not)* and/or finessed by progressives in support of a race-based admissions process. The Amici Curiae brief repeats arguments that affirmative action and racial diversity are very good and Catholic colleges especially think racial diversity and affirmative action are very good but, IMHO, does nothing to address point 2, above. Although off the topic, it was my understanding that Clarence Thomas benefitted from #1, above, and still supports #1, above. Since the matter before the courts is the separate matter of #2, I would assume the majority of the court (including Justice Thomas) will end the race-based admission process currently disadvantaging Asian students (on the basis of their race). *Dan McLaughlin '93 very gently skewers President Rougeau on precisely this point (conflation of 1 and 2) by italicizing the word "recruit"...letting Vince know Dan sees the deliberate conflation at work.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 20, 2023 9:49:36 GMT -5
I do think President Rougeau’s opinions publicly shared in his Boston Globe Op-Ed (excerpted and linked elsewhere on Crossports) regarding Justice Thomas are precisely the sort regularly tossed about (without rebuttal) in the faculty lounge of any progressive institution. (Not to mention The Boston Globe’s editorial room.) In fact, he was practically re-writing verses from progressive articles of faith.
But the National Review article (Dan McLaughlin, ‘93) brings up several points (some subtly and some not so subtly) and a perspective President Rougeau may not have considered. And should have.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 20, 2023 5:55:26 GMT -5
Significantly, a student-athlete would only be able to enter a NIL contract after they have completed at least one semester of course work. This restriction limits concerns over boosters and collectives engaging with student-athletes prior to enrollment. Further, it is unlawful for a booster or third party to directly or indirectly provide or offer to provide funds to induce a student-athlete to enroll in, transfer from, or remain at a specific institution.
The up-front "NIL" offers to recruits/transfers have resulted in bidding wars and are one of the more notable outcomes of recent rule changes - and further separate the 'haves' and 'have nots' in terms of basketball and football powerhouses. On the bright side (sarcasm alert!), certain colleges can now overtly purchase the services of top players and quickly turnaround struggling programs. At least the authors of the legislation see this glaring situation - but not sure it can be regulated.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 20, 2023 5:42:06 GMT -5
Author, Dan McLaughlin, is an HC alum, ‘93. Could not read the article because I used my allotment of free articles. Always good to read an article by a proud ✝️ alum in a respected magazine regarding our current president and most prominent graduate. (Whether or not one agrees 100% with the perspectives of any of the three.)
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 20, 2023 5:26:02 GMT -5
By DAN MCLAUGHLIN June 19, 2023 3:08 PM
If Justice Thomas’s own college is still holding his admission against him, it is just making his point about racial preferences.
I have a deep well of affection for my alma mater, the College of the Holy Cross. I met my wife there, we sent our older daughter there, and I made the most lasting friendships of my life there. I have never missed a reunion, and was back last weekend for my 30th. It’s not just the power of community of Holy Cross alumni and students: I continue to believe that there is an important role for the college to play in American life as the nation’s preeminent small Catholic liberal-arts college, with a historic mission of educating the next generation of Catholics in the faith and sending them forth to carry it into the world. It shouldn’t be just another link in an archipelago of secular colleges with identical student bodies and philosophies.
But all has not been well on Mt. St. James in recent years. The college’s new president, Vincent Rougeau, made a particularly bad decision in writing an op-ed in the Boston Globe a few weeks ago entitled “Clarence Thomas was a beneficiary of race-based admissions at my school”:
During the height of the civil rights movement, at a time when racial integration was sparking controversy on many campuses, College of the Holy Cross President the Rev. John Brooks drove around the country to personally recruit Black high school students to the college’s all-male, primarily white campus in Worcester. The 20 young men he recruited have become an illustrious group, including business leaders, a Pulitzer Prize winner, a Super Bowl champion, and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, class of 1971.
“Thomas, once the beneficiary of the most overt example of race-based admissions I can imagine, will probably be among the Supreme Court’s majority in the next few weeks when it is expected to strike down the use of affirmative action in college admissions. [Emphasis added.]”
This is shameful behavior on Rougeau’s part, both because it is an abuse of his position and because of what it says about racial preferences.
Clarence Thomas is one of the most prominent and distinguished alumni in the college’s history, probably rivaled among living alumni only by Boston Celtics legend Bob Cousy and, if you must include him, Dr. Anthony Fauci. Justice Thomas is in the arena of legal and political controversy, so I would never argue that he should be immune from criticism, including criticism from individuals within the Holy Cross community. (I have not hesitated to quarrel with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, even though she was in my law-school graduating class). But for the president of the college, its public representative, to wield the authority of his position to criticize Thomas is a disservice to the college, its students, and its alumni. Doing so says much about how politics have superseded a sense of good stewardship among so many of the liberals and progressives who today run our major institutions.
Think about it: When you hear from your old school, the tone used to discuss prominent alumni is typically as celebratory as a family Christmas card talking about the kids. This is intended to convey a sense of communal pride not only in the accomplishments of alumni but also in the many and varied paths they have taken in life. It’s supposed to convey a sense of family and belonging, and for alumni of a politically or socially left-leaning bent, it is nearly always done without a sense of judgment. That is doubly true of a small college with a huge reservoir of communal spirit and a long tradition of families attending across multiple generations. It is certainly how Holy Cross talks about all the other illustrious members of that group of black men — many of them prominent in public life — who were recruited along with Thomas.
It is hard to imagine the college’s official voices and administrators discussing Dr. Fauci or other left-leaning political figures in terms which suggest that they should be publicly castigated, even when they were taking steps that directly stifled campus life. There’s plenty of that out there for them in the world, but their own school should not be casting stones. And yet, when it’s conservative alumni, there is a tendency to treat them as, at best, somewhat embarrassing, and, at worst, people to be scolded from a school-provided soapbox. This is why we get the recent phenomenon of “open letters” from faculty, students, and alumni of various schools trying to excommunicate conservative politicians and judges who attended those schools. “Not in our name,” they often say.
The message sent by these sorts of jeremiads, when they are done with the official seal of the school’s approval, is not merely we disagree with you, but you do not belong; you are not one of us. Is it any wonder that conservative-leaning students and alumni, even those who are not all that politically active or vocal themselves, frequently feel alienated from their schools by this kind of thing?
As to the substance of Rougeau’s criticism, it validates Thomas’s fundamental critique of racial preferences. Thomas turns 75 years old next week. He has been out of college for 52 years. He went on from Holy Cross to Yale Law School, and then worked for a major corporation, in state government, and on Capitol Hill. He headed an executive-branch agency. He published a memoir and several law-review articles. He has been a justice of the United States Supreme Court for more than 31 years. He is nationally known, and has produced his own extensive and scholarly body of constitutional theory. He was once respected enough by his alma mater to serve on its board of trustees and receive an honorary degree.
And yet, Rougeau’s op-ed announces to the world that, even now, we will never stop telling people he only got into our college because he was black. Even after all these years. Even after everything he has done with the opportunities he has had. (Never mind that Rougeau cites as “the most overt example of race-based admissions I can imagine” a personal appeal by Father Brooks to recruit skeptical black students to the school and offer a scholarship to a student who was in desperate financial need.)
What better evidence could there be in favor of Thomas’s argument that a degree obtained by an African American from a school that uses racial preferences will always carry an asterisk of sorts? That benefiting from racial preferences degrades the dignity of the recipient, because it will always be either openly thrown in his face or silently held against him? That it creates a sense of debt to the institution granting the preference, or worse, a sense that the institution owns your opinions forever?
No black American should have to go through the world chased by that asterisk. There’s a famously mordant observation on racism in society that goes something like this: “What do you call a man who graduates last in his class in medical school? Doctor. What do you call a black man who graduates first in his class in medical school? N*****.” It’s a grim comment on a world that never lets you forget that some people will always see you first and foremost as black. That’s a world we’re supposed to be trying to get away from, not leaning into.
Justice Thomas has sworn an oath to the Constitution and laws of his nation. And nobody — least of all the president of his alma mater, writing in the pages of a major newspaper — should presume to tell him that he ought to rule on racial preferences in college admissions differently than his white colleagues due to his race or how he got into college.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 20, 2023 4:58:43 GMT -5
Got a feeling this was a common take on recent events…but certainly not in the generally anti-Thomas (and left-leaning) popular press. Quite complimentary of our college: I continue to believe that there is an important role for the college to play in American life as the nation’s preeminent small Catholic liberal-arts college, with a historic mission of educating the next generation of Catholics in the faith and sending them forth to carry it into the world. It shouldn’t be just another link in an archipelago of secular colleges with identical student bodies and philosophies. Should be available to read (free articles before a paywall kicks in). www.nationalreview.com/2023/06/holy-crosss-president-wrongs-clarence-thomas/
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 18, 2023 10:26:50 GMT -5
That is understood. At the same time nothing prevents them from respecting NLIs signed by student athletes. I thought all of us are in favor of the rights of student-athletes. A PSA who accepts a NLI gets a guarantee of athletics aid in exchange for not being able to decommit and go to another NLI school. The PSA is free to decommit and go to a non-NLI school. A PSA who commits to a non-NLI school is free to decommit and go to any school he wants, including a NLI school. There are PSAs that are being recruited hard by IVIES and us. Suppose a PSA commits to Harvard and then decides he wants to come here. If you believe we wouldn't take him you've probably been smoking something. He has a right to change his mind and come here, and we have the right to take him. By the same token, a PSA who has signed a NLI with us is free to decommit and go to Harvard, and Harvard has the right to take him. In both cases the PSA is exercising his right to do what is in his own best interest, which is what I thought we all support. The PSA has acted ethically in exercising his right to decommit and the school he chose to go to has acted ethically in accepting him. Something about glass houses and stones . . . What does ‘commit’ mean in the context of an Ivy League school? When does this occur? Does it ever occur? Not sure about the HC hypothesis either.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 18, 2023 9:39:28 GMT -5
The NCAA does not equate the IL's policy of need based aid available to all students with athletic scholarships. To some the IL is the gold standard of Div. I sports. It's an anomaly (their endowments and what they can offer in terms of financial aid to the student body in general) that few universities could come close to if they had to do business the same way. H/Y/P could be great at a higher D1 level in everything if they allocated their funds differently. It’s certainly not the need based aid so much as the poaching of committed (signed NLI) athletes that smacks of unethical conduct. Kind of icky and I’m surprised the PL has anything to do with them. We’re better than that.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 18, 2023 8:30:12 GMT -5
Between scholarship eras, I had a sense that Colgate might have had closer to an Ivy League culture of financial aid for non-scholarship athletes than HC did. This info seems to confirm that. Are you suggesting Colgate’s financial aid was more generous than HC’s in that era and approaching that of some of the Ivies? That could be. (One has to remember that HYP were/are far more liberal with financial aid than some of the other Ivies).
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 17, 2023 14:49:31 GMT -5
And because they don't provide athletically-related aid and they don't use the National Letter of Intent. The National Letter of Intent requires an offer of admission with athletically related aid so they could not offer the NLI even if they wanted to. That is understood. At the same time nothing prevents them from respecting NLIs signed by student athletes.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 17, 2023 9:55:34 GMT -5
Geez and it took the NBA/ABA and the NFL/AFL ten and 6 years respectively to merge. These guys did it in maybe two? In this case the legacy organization was being challenged by a far wealthier adversary willing to spend endlessly. And, of course, players could be lured because there are no PGA owners/contracts.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 17, 2023 8:27:59 GMT -5
I think the Dodgers wisely wrapped this up over an hour prior to the game and are swiftly moving on.
Of course there were apologists (this was, of course, honoring anti-Catholic hate so that sort always emerges) but regular folks were repulsed by the Dodgers in this particular outrage. Something tells me there was some wild scrambling by ownership to avoid their own Bud Light moment (or year).
Of course the Dodgers couldn’t apologize to Catholics (that sort of thing is streng verboten) so they sort of ‘disappeared’ the ceremony.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Jun 16, 2023 21:41:06 GMT -5
How are the IVIES able to get away with that? Same way there are able to fund way more than 63 equivalencies (80-85) on 120-130 man rosters. Same way they can poach an athlete after the athlete signs an NLI with another team. (Most recently a signed Fordham QB.) Remind me again why we even schedule football games with this shady group.
|
|