|
Post by sader1970 on Oct 25, 2017 10:26:20 GMT -5
So, which is it? They don't want a football team? There have been ample opportunities to drop football previously (see: Dan Allen's teams, before the LAC was a glimmer in anyone's eyes). See post hepatitis in the early 70's.
I've heard for years, including from the football coach, about the difficulty getting some recruits by admissions. That is one side of the equation. As I posted before, posters from other PL schools claim the same thing. All this talk about nerds not wanting a winning team is nonsense. They most definitely want to win but without sacrificing the academics. All this talk about getting out of the PL is a non-starter. You can probably make a point that the administration wants its cake and eat it too. Great academics and great football team (basketball and other sports as well). Stanford on an FCS level.
A football team for any college, including but especially Holy Cross, is critical to school spirit among students (not so much lately) and alumni. It is not just important for those of you who actually played.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Oct 25, 2017 10:34:08 GMT -5
rgs - yes this is my understanding as well. You have to have an even number if men v women. And in the rules, after all these years, the NCAA is still yet to account for the problem created by the fact that there is no female equivalent to football. You might consider field hockey the partial equivalent since there is no men’s field hockey team, yet. It would not be a financial windfall to cancel the minor sports, but it would certainly help financially. I can’t help but think it would help clean house to a certain degree so that the current administration could focus on the major sports, and again achieve success. Men Football Basketball Ice Hockey Baseball Women Soccer Field hockey Ice hockey Basketball Softball Lacrosse Women get field hockey, soccer, and lax to equal men’s football. Would that work? Minor note on execution - in order to play D-I sports, a school must have a minimum of 14 teams, (7 men and 7 women or 6 men and 8 women). I get concept of cutting lots of "minor" sports like PC did, but the ten listed would not qualify any school to participate in D-I On a minor tangent, things have gotten better for football Title IX-wise. Field hockey used to balance out ice hockey since there was no such thing as women's ice hockey. With the spread of ice hockey to women, field hockey is no longer has a men's "equivalent" partner and can now help offset football. I'm not sure of the Title-IX status of ice hockey at HC since the women are still a D-III team at a D-I school
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Oct 25, 2017 10:35:58 GMT -5
I believe that the "Senior Management" got a taste of what it was like to have a top rank 1AA Football team in the 80's and they very much did not like it. Not sure what you're talking about here, Frank V certainly liked it. He's now retired and everyone else on Fr B's staff is new but back then Frank V was just a chemistry professor.
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Oct 25, 2017 10:59:28 GMT -5
rgs - yes this is my understanding as well. You have to have an even number if men v women. And in the rules, after all these years, the NCAA is still yet to account for the problem created by the fact that there is no female equivalent to football. You might consider field hockey the partial equivalent since there is no men’s field hockey team, yet. It would not be a financial windfall to cancel the minor sports, but it would certainly help financially. I can’t help but think it would help clean house to a certain degree so that the current administration could focus on the major sports, and again achieve success. Men Football Basketball Ice Hockey Baseball Women Soccer Field hockey Ice hockey Basketball Softball Lacrosse Women get field hockey, soccer, and lax to equal men’s football. Would that work? Minor note on execution - in order to play D-I sports, a school must have a minimum of 14 teams, (7 men and 7 women or 6 men and 8 women). I get concept of cutting lots of "minor" sports like PC did, but the ten listed would not qualify any school to participate in D-I On a minor tangent, things have gotten better for football Title IX-wise. Field hockey used to balance out ice hockey since there was no such thing as women's ice hockey. With the spread of ice hockey to women, field hockey is no longer has a men's "equivalent" partner and can now help offset football. I'm not sure of the Title-IX status of ice hockey at HC since the women are still a D-III team at a D-I school The one thing you have to keep in mind is equivalencies. The D-1 maximum for field hockey is 12 equivalencies, so field hockey could help but isn't going to handle the burden of balancing 60/63 equivalencies in football. EDIT: Re-read your post and I better understand what you're saying now.
|
|
|
Post by joe on Oct 25, 2017 11:02:46 GMT -5
inor note on execution - in order to play D-I sports, a school must have a minimum of 14 teams, (7 men and 7 women or 6 men and 8 women). I get concept of cutting lots of "minor" sports like PC did, but the ten listed would not qualify any school to participate in D-I On a minor tangent, things have gotten better for football Title IX-wise. Field hockey used to balance out ice hockey since there was no such thing as women's ice hockey. With the spread of ice hockey to women, field hockey is no longer has a men's "equivalent" partner and can now help offset football. I'm not sure of the Title-IX status of ice hockey at HC since the women are still a D-III team at a D-I school Understand, good information. Would this work?
Men 1. Soccer 2. Football 3. Basketball 4. Ice Hockey 5. Baseball 6. Lacrosse
Women 1. Soccer 2. Field hockey 3. Ice hockey 4. Basketball 5. Softball 6. Lacrosse
7. Tennis? 8. Golf?
I picked tennis and golf because they strike me as low-volume, low-cost sports, but I can be wrong. I can see where this exercise gets stupid. This is still too many sports for a school the size of HC. We'd be cutting just cross-country, men's golf, rowing, swimming and diving, and track.
|
|
|
Post by Ray on Oct 25, 2017 11:25:12 GMT -5
If ADNP wants to make a real impact for this week, and with respect to the recruits on campus or at the GT game, for the future, he would offer to fly in a player from a past team to give a pre-game speech. I still remember a speech from Rob McGovern my freshman year. It was the most intense and electrifying pre-game speech I ever heard - in person or on the internet. I think the guys need a shot in the arm, and it may be someone reminding them of what they represent, why they play (or why they should be playing) and how their performance reflects on the school, the program, and most importantly, their brothers in that room. Isn't this way out of bounds for what an AD would/should be doing? The locker room is the coach's domain, even when it's an interim coach. ADNP going out and doing this on his own would seem like a dramatic overreach to me. If he works with Coach Rock on it, different story.
|
|
|
Post by inhocsigno on Oct 25, 2017 11:31:44 GMT -5
If ADNP wants to make a real impact for this week, and with respect to the recruits on campus or at the GT game, for the future, he would offer to fly in a player from a past team to give a pre-game speech. I still remember a speech from Rob McGovern my freshman year. It was the most intense and electrifying pre-game speech I ever heard - in person or on the internet. I think the guys need a shot in the arm, and it may be someone reminding them of what they represent, why they play (or why they should be playing) and how their performance reflects on the school, the program, and most importantly, their brothers in that room. Isn't this way out of bounds for what an AD would/should be doing? The locker room is the coach's domain, even when it's an interim coach. ADNP going out and doing this on his own would seem like a dramatic overreach to me. If he works with Coach Rock on it, different story. AD should "pay" to fly someone in. Not out of bounds to bring in speakers to the team. Of course he would work with the coach on scheduling, etc. Hey Rock (interim coach), we're going to bring in McGovern, TK, etc. to speak to the team before the game. Can you carve out ten minutes pre-game or at team breakfast, etc. Not really overreaching.
|
|
|
Post by Ray on Oct 25, 2017 11:49:16 GMT -5
Kind of a tough thing to do in current circumstances... anyone brought in is going to be looked at through the lens of "is he our next coach"? Tough to undermine the current staff who are trying to salvage the year.
|
|
|
Post by alum on Oct 25, 2017 12:25:49 GMT -5
We have all of these sports because we don't really know how we think about ourselves, indentity wise. Are we an Ivy? Too small. Are we a NESCAC? Too big, except for Tufts, not enough preppies and D1 athletics.
We could dump football and hockey and use all of the admissions slots for basketball, play anyone anywhere and try to make a bigger name for ourselves so that the BE would want us
or
We could try to figure out why some of our PL opponents (thinking especially of Colgate) seem to do this better than we do. What's the difference?
|
|
|
Post by 6sader7 on Oct 25, 2017 14:22:26 GMT -5
I wish this wasn't the case, but nobody outside of Holy Cross perceives Holy Cross to be anywhere close to the Ivy's from an academic perspective.
Harvard's acceptance rate is 5%, Holy Cross is 37%
Every college in the Nescac aside from Trinity and Conn College is below 20%
For reference, the University of Florida is 39%
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Oct 25, 2017 14:37:38 GMT -5
I wish this wasn't the case, but nobody outside of Holy Cross perceives Holy Cross to be anywhere close to the Ivy's from an academic perspective. Harvard's acceptance rate is 5%, Holy Cross is 37% Every college in the Nescac aside from Trinity and Conn College is below 20% For reference, the University of Florida is 39% Like Fordham, our academic reputation is somewhere between Villanova and Providence. I suspect the admin sees (and hopes) PL membership as keeping us nearer to Villanova than Providence.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Oct 25, 2017 14:40:21 GMT -5
We have all of these sports because we don't really know how we think about ourselves, indentity wise. Are we an Ivy? Too small. Are we a NESCAC? Too big, except for Tufts, not enough preppies and D1 athletics. We could dump football and hockey and use all of the admissions slots for basketball, play anyone anywhere and try to make a bigger name for ourselves so that the BE would want us or We could try to figure out why some of our PL opponents (thinking especially of Colgate) seem to do this better than we do. What's the difference?Colgate's academic reputation is much stronger. That helps.
|
|
|
Post by 6sader7 on Oct 25, 2017 14:43:27 GMT -5
I can see that.
It's just interesting to me how hard it is for us to get kids in for sports when our admissions acceptance rate is 37% and we don't even require SAT's.
|
|
|
Post by 6sader7 on Oct 25, 2017 14:44:32 GMT -5
We have all of these sports because we don't really know how we think about ourselves, indentity wise. Are we an Ivy? Too small. Are we a NESCAC? Too big, except for Tufts, not enough preppies and D1 athletics. We could dump football and hockey and use all of the admissions slots for basketball, play anyone anywhere and try to make a bigger name for ourselves so that the BE would want us or We could try to figure out why some of our PL opponents (thinking especially of Colgate) seem to do this better than we do. What's the difference?Colgate's academic reputation is much stronger. That helps. Agree - I would say that Colgate is the most closely associated with the Ivy's of any PL school. Crazy they're getting kids that we can't.
|
|
|
Post by gks on Oct 25, 2017 14:52:42 GMT -5
SATs are required for athletes.
|
|
|
Post by 6sader7 on Oct 25, 2017 14:56:41 GMT -5
SATs are required for athletes. It seems strange that athletes are being held to more difficult admissions criteria than the general student population.
|
|
|
Post by joe on Oct 25, 2017 14:57:59 GMT -5
Is not Villanova is somewhere between Providence and HC?
|
|
|
Post by 6sader7 on Oct 25, 2017 15:07:38 GMT -5
Is not Villanova is somewhere between Providence and HC? Yes - Correct. Villanova acceptance rate ~44% and Providence ~50%
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Oct 25, 2017 15:07:45 GMT -5
SATs are required for athletes. It seems strange that athletes are being held to more difficult admissions criteria than the general student population. The school did away with requiring SAT's because they felt it was not an accurate indicator of success on the college level The NCAA requires SAT's for athletes. School says one thing - NCAA says another and the athletes must meet both. Hence the double standard
|
|
|
Post by freethef4 on Oct 25, 2017 15:19:42 GMT -5
I can see that. It's just interesting to me how hard it is for us to get kids in for sports when our admissions acceptance rate is 37% and we don't even require SAT's. Because it is a canard. Admissions is not your problem, nice to blame this on Annie Mac but not close to being true. It is a crutch not a real problem and it makes some alums feel better to say that "we are so hard to get into." Not the case and especially not so for athletes who are tagged by their coaches as "special interest" Look elsewhere for the answer to mediocrity; LAC in period of STEM/Business uptick, Worcester as a destination, and probably the number one hindrance, a mascot representing mayhem, slaughter, and Western hegemony. Better chose a more pastoral moniker, sorry Rams is taken.
|
|
|
Post by fellas85 on Oct 25, 2017 15:21:39 GMT -5
I can see that. It's just interesting to me how hard it is for us to get kids in for sports when our admissions acceptance rate is 37% and we don't even require SAT's. Because it is a canard. Admissions is not your problem, nice to blame this on Annie Mac but not close to being true. It is a crutch not a real problem and it makes some alums feel better to say that "we are so hard to get into." Not the case and especially not so for athletes who are tagged by their coaches as "special interest" Look elsewhere for the answer to mediocrity; LAC in period of STEM/Business uptick, Worcester as a destination, and probably the number one hindrance, a mascot representing mayhem, slaughter, and Western hegemony. Better chose a more pastoral moniker, sorry Rams is taken.
|
|
|
Post by crusader1970 on Oct 25, 2017 15:24:44 GMT -5
Is not Villanova is somewhere between Providence and HC? Yes - Correct. Villanova acceptance rate ~44% and Providence ~50% Acceptance rates can be deceiving. If much higher quality students are applying to College A than College B and the two schools have the same acceptance rate, which school do you think has a higher aptitude student body?
|
|
|
Post by spenser on Oct 25, 2017 15:27:29 GMT -5
I very much doubt if the “Crusader” is the problem. And Rams can be vicious.
|
|
|
Post by fellas85 on Oct 25, 2017 15:28:28 GMT -5
For what it's worth, my son applied to both HC and Colgate. HC said no. He graduated from Colgate. In his 4 years there I can tell u that Colgate embraced the student-athlete as a vital piece of the overall Colgate experience. They accepted student athletes that other PL schools would not, on numerous occasions. The overall attitude towards their sports programs and the student athlete as a whole contrasted HCs in many ways.
|
|
|
Post by 6sader7 on Oct 25, 2017 15:29:44 GMT -5
Yes - Correct. Villanova acceptance rate ~44% and Providence ~50% Acceptance rates can be deceiving. If much higher quality students are applying to College A than College B and the two schools have the same acceptance rate, which school do you think has a higher aptitude student body? Agree - It's hard to tell when you no longer require SAT's and the value of High School GPA's depends greatly on the High School.
|
|