|
Post by hcpride on Mar 22, 2024 5:01:17 GMT -5
I’ve watched all or parts of 90 pct of our games and I didn’t recognize that team tonight - have not played with that efficiency any other time (maybe the game at Lafayette) But let’s remember UT-M lost by 30 in their conference championship game. How do we game plan for Iowa ? Start with smothering Clark. The problem is that she is six foot tall and faster than all our players AND she is a superb passer. One of the best ever. And the other four Iowa starters are themselves complete physical mismatches v our players. I guess we slow it down on offense to try to limit their touches. I don’t see our defense as capable of slowing down Iowa’s scoring when Iowa does have the ball.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 21, 2024 21:50:35 GMT -5
Nice win tonight.
Next game the crowd and opponent will be VERY different, let’s hope we are not overwhelmed early.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 21, 2024 5:17:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 21, 2024 4:44:38 GMT -5
The College tweeted confirming the 16% acceptance rate and a 10% increase in applications; 36% higher than 2022. When we have good news regarding application/acceptance numbers we are quite capable of pushing that out quickly. And increased applications pushes all sorts of stats in a positive direction. Assuming we’ve now got a handle on yield -- shaped mightily by Early Decision I and II as well as an admissions emphasis on ‘demonstrated interest” — this is looking to be a great performance by the HC admissions folks.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 20, 2024 18:56:08 GMT -5
Excellent video. His mom, who gives a couple of quotes in the film, is Class of ‘82.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 20, 2024 16:09:03 GMT -5
Speaking of Long Island lax, Shoreham-Wading River’s Xavier Arline has excelled at the USNA in football (QB) and lax.(second high scorer last spring) Not sure I'd say excelled as he been in and out of the starting lineup as a QB for the struggling Navy football program over his career and his participation in lacrosse has been spotty (due to not playing as a frosh and various injuries since then) but the fact he's been on both rosters - especially considering the academic rigor at Navy - is quite an accomplishment. This could be a pretty good year for Navy Lax and having Xavier healthy for a full season will be a big plus.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 20, 2024 10:10:21 GMT -5
Obviously, Sluka could have been our best lax player ever along with being a super QB for us but that didn't happen.
Notre Dame's Faison doing sports at a high level in key positions for two national caliber teams is not necessarily unprecedented but extraordinarily rare nowadays. I'm not sure the respective head coaches deep down are necessarily happy with it but they both say all the right things in public and Jordan Faison helps both teams. Certainly didn't hurt when it came to landing the little brother (football schollie BUT perhaps the best lax player in his class in the country).
Trivia for the LI lax fans: Jordan Faison came north each summer in high school to play for Joe Spallina's club lacrosse team. Little brother does the same.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 19, 2024 11:50:12 GMT -5
It would not surprise me if Grace saw a fair amount of court time against UT. Plays pretty stout D & would seem to match up well against their wings & guards. UT plays pretty much a 4 guard offense. As to Iowa, anybody whose healthy will play, HC doesn't really have the size, athletic ability against that team. Iowa really only has 2 players under 6' in their rotation, one is off the bench. As far as Iowa goes, they are an illustration as to why some folks have pointed out that the game is very different between the very top women's teams (where athletic six footers sprint up and down the floor dribbling effortlessly and flinging passes off the dribble to even-taller teammates) and the lesser qualifying teams like HC. Which is one reason we see many whopping mismatches in round one (like HC v Maryland last year). .
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 19, 2024 8:10:00 GMT -5
The 16 pct acceptance rate is for ‘regular admission’? What pct of the class was accepted ‘early decision’? We tend to only hear the overall admit rate and have to hit the CDS to find a breakdown. Generally speaking we look to fill half the class via ED (this is a gross approximation) - that is very advantageous to our overall admit rate and it can mean our ED percentage is pretty high.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 19, 2024 7:23:05 GMT -5
Got some intel that the acceptance rate this year is 16% - to be announced soon. Bravo - more progress on competitiveness and profile. Last year was 21% so 16% (assuming we accept a similar number) represents an expanded pool of applicants. As far as the academic quality of accepted students, our numbers are very fuzzy (test score optional, etc.).
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 18, 2024 18:47:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 18, 2024 15:12:53 GMT -5
The portal is really cooking. There is a frosh from Penn who just entered. Not something you see every day. He had 17 offers in HS including our Crusaders. He is a shooting guard. Hypothetical question. What if HC was his 2nd choice and he still had an interest? Would you offer him a scholarship even though he isn't a big? I was thinking along those lines today about the Patriots upcoming draft. If there are 4-5 absolute "can't miss" prospects in the draft and none are QBs, do you use the 3rd pick in the draft on one of those 4-5 players or do you take a QB who is considered a very good prospect. Not sure HC is the destination for a kid leaving Penn. That is one of the problems (w/exceptions !) we have with the portal. I guess we are a developmental D-1 program but if one of our kids develops he may very well be off to a better program.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 18, 2024 13:51:00 GMT -5
Theoretically possible to turn a program around via the portal. Emphasis on theory. Stable teams should have an inherent advantage. Good point. At the same time there are some very smart teams that use it prudently to prevent 'rebuilding' years. UConn comes immediately to mind.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 18, 2024 9:28:46 GMT -5
Big East with just 3 was a bit of a surprise.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 17, 2024 12:08:38 GMT -5
Color announcer: both teams top 30. In what? Top 230.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 17, 2024 9:00:07 GMT -5
Many of our losses over the last few years are not as close as the scores indicate (not saying the scores are particularly close). Yesterday, for example, Laffy was up 16-4 at the start of the 4th quarter...final score 17-8. Lots of calling off of the dogs, substitutions, and even goalie substitutions.
Don't see our issues as facilities or coaches.
Significant boost in schollie dollars, wisely divvied up to lure in some quality players, is the only route to reducing the talent gap and consistently finishing near the top of the Patriot League. I don't think HC admin is interested.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 15, 2024 7:31:59 GMT -5
Duty, Honor, Country remains the motto. It would be a rare West Point grad who can’t recite portions of MacArthur’s speech that references those three hallowed words. Beyond that, mission statements come and go (tinkering with mission statements is practically a hobby with some folks).
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 14, 2024 10:50:15 GMT -5
I always wondered how Colgate got the players they did in the 1970s and 1980s without technically offering scholarships....multiple guys who went on to the NFL, many tremendous players that beat very good scholarship teams at the time....had to be a LOT of financial aid etc. Speaking of only one of their excellent players, QB Steve Calabria was unknown (and virtually unrecruited) out of a suspect high school program who I’m assuming got some sort of a partial grant-in-aid ((at best) and then developed very quickly as a QB. He stuck with Colgate. Seemed to have the talent level - but maybe stronger arm - of Muldoon. Drafted 9th round.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 13, 2024 12:32:56 GMT -5
In the context of the reparations notion I was responding to, perhaps a discount if one of your Northern ancestors was killed or seriously wounded in the Civil War. Your original post opined that descendants of enslaved people owed something to descendants of killed Union soldiers. How about affirmative action consideration for the latter group to historically black colleges? In the context of the reparations notion I was responding to, I think it makes sense those descendants (of the mostly white killed and maimed Union soldiers) would earn a full exemption or discount from any reparations to the descendants of freed slaves. As long as folks are dwelling on long ago events related to long-dead persons. Of course, the whole notion of reparations for slavery paid to descendants of slaves by current US citizens (whose ancestors may or may not have been in the states 200 years ago) may be a foolish non-starter from the get-go.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 13, 2024 7:54:39 GMT -5
I've always wondered if there is some sort of ethical obligation owed by families descended from enslaved persons to the descendants of Union soldiers killed or grievously injured in the war to end slavery. While slavery (still ongoing in parts of the world) has been around for thousands of years (if not more) it is highly unusual in human history for mass numbers of free men to die in an effort to stamp it out. You mean soldiers want more than to be recognized at ball games and have people say, "Thank you for your service?"… In the context of the reparations notion I was responding to, perhaps a discount if one of your Northern ancestors was killed or seriously wounded in the Civil War.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 12, 2024 20:27:33 GMT -5
Cute. I am very familiar with modern scholarship on the Civil War. When you generalize to States Rights as a primary cause of the War you leave out several others (of which I am sure you are aware). Here is a list of "primary" causes of the Civil War (in no particular order): 1. States’ Rights 2. The Missouri Compromise 3 The Dred Scott Decision 4. The Abolitionist Movement 5. John Brown’s Raid (Harper’s Ferry) and Trial 6. Slavery in America (yes it is on the list but only as one cause of many) 7. Harriet Tubman 8. Uncle Tom’s Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe 9. Secessionism 10. Election of Lincoln *11 Newspapers (and the few men who owned them and controlled public debate) It was a far more complicated than some with agendas might have others believe. Modern historians consider this list convincing evidence regarding the centrality of the issue of slavery to the Civil War.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 12, 2024 20:00:26 GMT -5
Serious historians (yes, they are "modern") would not agree with your Wikipedia statement. BTW, few use Wikipedia as a serious source for anything. Some entries are good but many are weak or even outright wrong. That was for the sake of brevity. (I thought I typed that disclaimer). You may be unfamiliar with the direction of modern scholarship on this particular topic. Where traditional scholars said “States Rights was the primary cause of the Civil War” modern scholars emphasize “States Rights to have slaves was the primary cause of the Civil War, secession, etc”.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 12, 2024 19:50:56 GMT -5
I've always wondered if there is some sort of ethical obligation owed by families descended from enslaved persons to the descendants of Union soldiers killed or grievously injured in the war to end slavery. While slavery (still ongoing in parts of the world) has been around for thousands of years (if not more) it is highly unusual in human history for mass numbers of free men to die in an effort to stamp it out. That is an interesting point. But slavery, while a factor in the war and the reason why some men joined to fight in the War, it was not the primary cause of the War Between the States so that is a very different situation. To the extent it matters, modern historians now speak of slavery as the primary cause of the war: “The central cause of the war was the dispute over whether slavery would be permitted to expand into the western territories, leading to more slave states, or be prevented from doing so, which many believed would place slavery on a course of ultimate extinction.” (For the sake of brevity I’m quoting Wikipedia: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 12, 2024 16:36:15 GMT -5
Thanks for helping me to get up to date on correct speech. I guess anyone who "owned" an enslaved person was an enslaver as well as those who made the institution possible (sailors on ships that carried slaves, for one example). Would that also apply to those Africans who captured members of rival tribes and sold them into slavery to start the process? What would be the obligations of those African tribes today? Regarding obligations...there are both legal and ethical obligations. Do the people of this country, many of whom are descended from families that were not in North America at any time during the period of slavery, owe for something they never did? Of course not. However, there is IMHO an ethical obligation to offer something to descendants of these people that can be a symbolically important way to start acknowledging what was done to innocent people. I've always wondered if there is some sort of ethical obligation owed by families descended from enslaved persons to the descendants of Union soldiers killed or grievously injured in the war to end slavery. While slavery (still ongoing in parts of the world) has been around for thousands of years (if not more) it is highly unusual in human history for mass numbers of free men to die in an effort to stamp it out.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Mar 12, 2024 15:16:51 GMT -5
I like the book and the fact that this topic is being aired out. But in wording of the announcement, I wonder how the Jesuits "enslaved" these 272 people. I do not believe they actually captured free Blacks and enslaved them...or did they? The phrase "enslaved by the Jesuits" is a bit unclear. It might be more correct to say "held by the Jesuits" or "owned by the Jesuits." Of course neither phrase, no matter how correct it may be, does anything to make this story acceptable. The latest acceptable term for a slave holder is an “enslaver”. (So, using the latest acceptable term, “Jesuit enslavers” means Jesuit slave holders…so “enslaved by Jesuits” means slaves held by Jesuits).
|
|