|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Apr 22, 2018 8:33:49 GMT -5
I continue to apologize for my ignorance, but I still fail to understand how HC could succeed in a higher level athletic conference when it cannot dominate one single sport in the PL(or even be slightly above average competitively).. I also don't understand how HC would have more in common with, say, UMass and VCU than it does with the other PL schools. For that matter, I don't exactly understand how HC is so different than its PL competitors. I guess I really need the dumbed down version of this analysis. I'm with Dave on this. It does absolutely defy logic to suggest that we could do better against tougher competition. We're in a conference with even playing fields now-why should we not be able to compete? What is Bucknell doing that we cannot do?
|
|
|
Post by realism on Apr 22, 2018 9:00:51 GMT -5
I continue to apologize for my ignorance, but I still fail to understand how HC could succeed in a higher level athletic conference when it cannot dominate one single sport in the PL(or even be slightly above average competitively).. I also don't understand how HC would have more in common with, say, UMass and VCU than it does with the other PL schools. For that matter, I don't exactly understand how HC is so different than its PL competitors. I guess I really need the dumbed down version of this analysis. We're in a conference with even playing fields now-why should we not be able to compete? You've missed the point. H.C. is not proving to be on an even playing field with the rest of the P.L..
The important question is whether or how long it will take to fill this gap ? Despite all the initiatives by the new A.D., the performance trajectory has hardly budged...4 and a half seasons into the new regime. I'm not suggesting panicking. I think it's only prudent to have contingency re-configuration plans which could include some "lateral" to "downish" conference alignment, if this performance gap persists. ( These are good questions: "why should we not be able to compete? What is Bucknell doing that we cannot do?" ) Changing A.D.'s, as suggested on this thread, may not address the systemic problems that H.C. may find has become a more permanent problem than posters care to admit at this juncture.
|
|
|
Post by gks on Apr 22, 2018 9:01:44 GMT -5
Nate Pine came in to an athletic department that was 20 years behind it's peers. High school athletic departments were run better. Yes plans for Luth were developed under Regan but he couldn't raise two nickels. He sat on the plans for 10 years and made coaches recruit on empty promises of a new facility. Time and patience are needed.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Apr 22, 2018 9:12:52 GMT -5
I am, as usual, with NAD but realism has clarified he is not looking to upgrade leagues which implies he would like to "downgrade."
I am opposed to the latter and also realize that the former isn't going to happen unless and until (probably never) we can dominate the PL. So we are where we are and that is not an especially bad thing. In fact, we have more in common with PL schools than almost any other league. For the most part, with few exceptions, the other PL schools are high achieving liberal arts colleges with roughly the same enrollments. BU, the service academies are obvious exceptions.
And I will confess that I don't lose a lot of sleep because HC is a PL bottom feeder when it comes to the Olympic sports. If I had my druthers, I would lose most of the minor sports but that is a "cost" of being in the PL and probably title IX to offset football. As long as the PL counts field hockey the same as men's basketball in the President Cup standings, I don't give a darn about winning that trophy (if that's what it is).
I want Holy Cross to win, dominate, in men's basketball and football and baseball. Yes, that sounds sexist but those are the main sports I care about because those were the sports I followed when I was on campus (feel free to call out my ageism now). Second tier interest would be men's and women's ice hockey, ladies basketball, men's soccer, LAX.
As for the rest, I hope that Holy Cross wins in all sports but as I've always said in business: "if everything is a priority, nothing is a priority." Let's focus (my way of saying, as td128 says: "let's win!")!
|
|
|
Post by realism on Apr 22, 2018 9:39:26 GMT -5
If I had my druthers, I would lose most of the minor sports but that is a "cost" of being in the PL and probably title IX to offset football. As long as the PL counts field hockey the same as men's basketball in the President Cup standings, I don't give a darn about winning that trophy (if that's what it is). I think H.C .today may be more different than the rest of the P.L. institutions than you may know about. As an example, I think it meant more to Colgate this year, ( across all institutional constituents ) to play in the title game for the NCAA national championship in women's ice hockey than to have had respectable seasons in men's football and basketball. I think it meant a lot to Navy ( as a national institution devoted to recruiting women leaders for service around the world ) to make the NCAA Final Four in WLAX. The differences between H.C. and the rest of the PL are more extensive than you suggest. The P.L. goals are broad and highly respected nationally. With all due respect, they're not a template drawn from a 1970's college yearbook. Please note that this is a thread started by the call to replace ADNP. That's why I suggested rather than firing the A.D., "I think it's only prudent for H.C. to have contingency re-configuration plans which could include some "lateral" to "downish" conference alignment, ( which might include limiting the number of sports offered) if this performance/culture gap with the rest of the PL persists."
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Apr 22, 2018 9:39:44 GMT -5
And who might that be? You must have a candidate in mind, otherwise this is just trolling. And you must also have some well-formed ideas about how this next AD will accomplish the objectives you set out, and why he/she can succeed where ADNP has (in your opinion) failed.. IMO, the former AD was sent on his way, in part, because the inmates were running the asylum. I have no candidate in mind. But the fact ADNP and the CCSUAD were our two best candidates speaks volumes about either the process or how far HC has fallen. PP you know more about what's going on on campus than any of us. The inmates running the asylum was fixed when ADNP arrived. Pleaseeeee. I don't know all that much about what's going on, but the posting for the AD position contained pre-requisite qualifications that pretty much ruled out anyone with no prior experience in athletics administration. The job is much more complicated than when RP Sr was AD, much of which is the result of Federal requirements, NCAA requirements, and conference rules. Its a lot different from when you could pretty much chart your own course as an ECAC independent, and EBW could be a de facto AD... (Do you think the campus cop of yesteryear could fill out the annual, Federally-required Clery report on campus safety and crime?) As for the asylum, when a coach is supposed to be off-campus while a matter is being reviewed, returns to campus and begins to interact with the media, and is ushered off camp;us; when the same coach organizes a letter-writing-in-support-of-the-coach campaign in the community and the external coaching fraternity; and when the same coach unilaterally decides he is going to return to campus, and does, then I do indeed wonder who is running the place. _____________________________ As for my question to the poster who started this thread, his outline for what athletics should be at HC was male-centric. I don't know how aware he is of the repercussions of Title IX on college athletics, and that at most schools today, female students outnumber (often by a large margin) male students. And the athletics program has to reflect that. I looked at many of the schools in the A-10, CAA, BE, and PL to identify those schools where females outnumbered males, where there was rough parity, and schools where males outnumbered females. Females are in the majorityAmerican, BostonU, Butler, Colgate, College of Charleston, Duquesne, Elon, Fordham, GW, GU, LaSalle, Loyola, Marquette, Providence, St. Joe's, Seton Hall, St. John's, Univ of Richmond, Villanova, Xavier ParityBucknell, HC, Davidson, Lafayette, Northeastern, St. Bonaventure, Males are in the majorityDayton, Lehigh,(Bolded: non female-majority schools with engineering programs) On islands by themselves as LACs are HC and Davidson. St. Bonaventure is in dire straits and publishes little objective, standardized data about itself. Davidson plays non-scollie football, and no ice hockey. It also gets beaucoup monies from the Duke Endowment, and offers a substantial number of academic merit scollies.
|
|
|
Post by ncaam on Apr 22, 2018 10:12:03 GMT -5
Let’s remember Pine has hired a plethora of subordinates. If we hired Ronald Perry senior again, he could hire subordinates to handle the issues that you are so concerned about. It’s a nightmare on campus right now! And a lot of that comes back to our friend athletic director Nathaniel Pine.The lunatics truly run the asylum.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Apr 22, 2018 16:26:41 GMT -5
RP Sr., has no interest in again becoming the AD. So why even raise that as a possibility? _______________________________
I have posited that you get what you pay for. I did this volleyball, but I'll do it for some other sports where presumably HC would like to be competitive (i.e., I'm not doing it for golf or tennis)/
Volleyball, Expenses in 2016-2017 / conference record 2017-18 AU $1,1M / 16.1 Bucknell $.92M / 8-8 Colgate .$.89M / 9-7 Lehigh $.85N / 9.7 Loyola .$,81M / 4-12 HC .$.58M / 2-10 Lafayette $.48M / 2-10
For HC to consistently place in the top half of the conference, it needs to pay for 4-5 more scollies.
|
|
|
Post by realism on Apr 22, 2018 19:59:38 GMT -5
RP Sr., has no interest in again becoming the AD. So why even raise that as a possibility? _______________________________ I have posited that you get what you pay for. I did this volleyball, but I'll do it for some other sports where presumably HC would like to be competitive (i.e., I'm not doing it for golf or tennis)/ Volleyball, Expenses in 2016-2017 / conference record 2017-18AU $1,1M / 16.1 Bucknell $.92M / 8-8 Colgate .$.89M / 9-7 Lehigh $.85N / 9.7 Loyola .$,81M / 4-12 HC .$.58M / 2-10 Lafayette $.48M / 2-10 For HC to consistently place in the top half of the conference, it needs to pay for 4-5 more scollies. I think this kind of individual sport financial analysis tells the story about H.C.'s challenge if it chooses to be relevant in the P.L.. You should do the financial run-down on WLAX, as the PL may emerge as a 2-bid NCAA tourney participant this year. #8 Loyola and #11 Navy, with full schollies and with rigorous top tier national O.O.C. schedules are in their own financial class. The newest PL entrant, full scholly Army, is rapidly ascending. Boston, which I believe is full scholly still maintains a rigorous top tier national O.O.C. schedule--but is yet to make a P.L. run. B.U. was a perennial NCAA participant when it was in America East. Just making the PL tourney has become tough for some traditional PL powers in the new $ environment. Colgate and Lehigh, who, in the past have had good-but-not-full scholly support have to fight just to stay relevant. Perhaps, most importantly, these six teams are led by very successful experienced coaches who've been at these institutions for a long time. These coaches garner very competitive compensation packages. An additional financial challenge for H. C.. I think there are similar top heavy financial imbalances in every P.L. M's and W's sport, We're talking about M's and W's lax, soccer, etc.--not obscure sports either nationally or in the P.L..'s plans. Sure, fb and bball are especially important to H.C.. Sader 70's dismissal of these "olympic" sports may represent a disconnect with the mandate given to ADNP by H.C. to stay in the P.L... But, the P.L., especially the top tier of the league is setting a high bar. Mid-tier teams like Colgate and Lehigh are adapting with their own strategies. Few institutions can fully financially support every sport. As a bottom feeder in many sports, H.C. may just be a "fish out of water" in today's P.L. environment. Performance success my continue to be elusive for many years.
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Apr 22, 2018 20:52:31 GMT -5
RP Sr., has no interest in again becoming the AD. So why even raise that as a possibility? _______________________________ I have posited that you get what you pay for. I did this volleyball, but I'll do it for some other sports where presumably HC would like to be competitive (i.e., I'm not doing it for golf or tennis)/ Volleyball, Expenses in 2016-2017 / conference record 2017-18AU $1,1M / 16.1 Bucknell $.92M / 8-8 Colgate .$.89M / 9-7 Lehigh $.85N / 9.7 Loyola .$,81M / 4-12 HC .$.58M / 2-10 Lafayette $.48M / 2-10 For HC to consistently place in the top half of the conference, it needs to pay for 4-5 more scollies. You should do the financial run-down on WLAX, as the PL may emerge a 2-bid NCAA tourney participant this year. #8 Loyola and #11 Navy, with full schollies and with rigorous top tier national O.O.C. schedules are in their own financial class. The newest PL entrant, full scholly Army, is rapodly ascending. Boston, which I believe is full scholly still maintains a rigorous top tier national O.O.C. schedule--but is yet to make a P.L. run. B.U. was a perennial NCAA participant when it was in America East. Just making the PL tourney has become tough for some traditional PL powers in the new $ environment. Colgate and Lehigh, who, in the past have had good-but-not-full scholly support have to fight just to stay relevant. Perhaps, most importantly, these six teams are led by vey successful coaches who've been at these institutions for a long time. These coaches garner very competitive compensation packages. Not a good omen fot H.C,. I think there are similar top heavy financial imbalances in every P.L. M's and W's sport, We're talking about M's and W's lax, soccer, etc.--not obscure sports either nationally or in the P.L..'s plans. Sure, fb and bball are especially important to H.C.. Sader 70's dismissal of these "olympic" sports may represent a disconnect with the mandate given to ADNP by H.C. to stay in the P.L... But, the P.L., especially the top tier of the league is setting a high bar. Mid-tier teams are adapting. As a bottom feeder in many sports, H.C. may be a "fish out of water" in today's P.L. environment. There are a lot of factors in winning - and number of scholarships is certainly important. But winning tradition, quality of coaching, and facilitires are also very important. Look at PL men's lacrosse for example. Bucknell has no scholarships and spends the least money on the sport of any PL school. Yet it has been consistently good in the sport, often showing up in the top 20. This year they are PL co-champs and a top 10 team, despite the lack of scholarships and money. PL expenditures on lax: Loyola University Maryland . . . . . 1,808,552 Boston University . . . . . 1,583,019 Lehigh University . . . . . 1,389,276 Colgate University . . . . . 1,120,519 Lafayette College . . . . . 828,286 Holy Cross . . . . . 688,368 Bucknell University . . . . . 674,920 Boston U and Colgate, on the other hand, spent a lot of money and had very mediocre seasons.
|
|
|
Post by realism on Apr 22, 2018 21:02:46 GMT -5
You should do the financial run-down on WLAX, as the PL may emerge a 2-bid NCAA tourney participant this year. #8 Loyola and #11 Navy, with full schollies and with rigorous top tier national O.O.C. schedules are in their own financial class. The newest PL entrant, full scholly Army, is rapodly ascending. Boston, which I believe is full scholly still maintains a rigorous top tier national O.O.C. schedule--but is yet to make a P.L. run. B.U. was a perennial NCAA participant when it was in America East. Just making the PL tourney has become tough for some traditional PL powers in the new $ environment. Colgate and Lehigh, who, in the past have had good-but-not-full scholly support have to fight just to stay relevant. Perhaps, most importantly, these six teams are led by vey successful coaches who've been at these institutions for a long time. These coaches garner very competitive compensation packages. Not a good omen fot H.C,. I think there are similar top heavy financial imbalances in every P.L. M's and W's sport, We're talking about M's and W's lax, soccer, etc.--not obscure sports either nationally or in the P.L..'s plans. Sure, fb and bball are especially important to H.C.. Sader 70's dismissal of these "olympic" sports may represent a disconnect with the mandate given to ADNP by H.C. to stay in the P.L... But, the P.L., especially the top tier of the league is setting a high bar. Mid-tier teams are adapting. As a bottom feeder in many sports, H.C. may be a "fish out of water" in today's P.L. environment. There are a lot of factors in winning - and number of scholarships is certainly important. But winning tradition, quality of coaching, and facilitires are also very important. Look at PL men's lacrosse for example. Bucknell has no scholarships and spends the least money on the sport of any PL school. Yet it has been consistently good in the sport, often showing up in the top 20. This year they are PL co-champs and a top 10 team, despite the lack of scholarships and money. PL expenditures on lax: Loyola University Maryland . . . . . 1,808,552 Boston University . . . . . 1,583,019 Lehigh University . . . . . 1,389,276 Colgate University . . . . . 1,120,519 Lafayette College . . . . . 828,286 Holy Cross . . . . . 688,368 Bucknell University . . . . . 674,920 Boston U and Colgate, on the other hand, spent a lot of money and had very mediocre seasons. Bucknell is a great contrast for H.C.. Bucknell has created a special integrated culture supporting its athletic program. It underscores the theory that H.C.may have a systemic problem. The question was raised by a poster above: "We're in a conference with even playing fields now-why should we not be able to compete?" I think the answer to that is more complex than most posters here care to admit.
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Apr 22, 2018 21:27:17 GMT -5
Curious what you mean by a "special integrated culture supporting its athletic program". The Bucknell administration in recent years has not been very supportive of athletics - and the only sport that had any athletic scholarships at all until recent years was basketball. The move to scholarship football - which Bucknell supported very reluctantly - forced their hand on scholarships for selected women's sports. But the administration still will not allow scholarships in other men's sports - even if they were to be funded solely by private donations. Fortunately a number of alums have stepped up to provide very good facilities - at no cost to Bucknell, which has helped offset the lack of financial support for scholarships. Unfortunately the administration at the moment has put a moratorium on new athletic facilities, even those paid for solely by alums.
I agree that the answer to HC's lack of competitiveness in many sports is complex. I have said many times that I think many of the problems in a number of sports have been caused by mediocre coaches, a weak AD in past years, little tradition in many sports, and sub-par facilities in some sports.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Apr 22, 2018 21:37:05 GMT -5
Realism: Huh? Where is my "disconnect?" Isn't that what I said?
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Apr 23, 2018 6:59:01 GMT -5
W Lax 2016-17 spending in thousands / 2017-18 Conference record to date (Georgetown $ included because it was easy to do)
Boston U $1373 / 5-3 Loyola $1347 / 8-0 [Georgetown $1226] Colgate $1157 / 4-4 Lafayette $1131 / 1-6 Bucknell $1035 / 1-7 Lehigh $1027 / 6-2 Holy Cross $772 / 4-4 American $450 / 0-7
Men's lax Loyola $1808 / 7-1 Boston Univ $1583 / 3-5 Lehigh $1389 / 5-3 [Georgetown $1382] Colgate $1120 / 3-5 Lafayette $828 / 0-8 Holy Cross $688 / 2-6 Bucknell $674 / 7-1
As bison notes, Bucknell has greatly overperformed in men's Lax. IMO, HC has somewhat overperformed in W's Lax.
Lafayette has created a commission to examine why its athletic program is not doing well. __________________________________________
I very much suspect that HC's skimping on scollies because AD budgeted monies are being spent on architect and engineering fees for Luth and now the student rec center. (The A/E fees for the latter are probably $3-4 million.) And then there is the cost of equipping the new facilities, some of which is in the construction budget, and some of which is not. The cost of new video screens for the Hart = at least 10 full scollies. .
|
|
|
Post by crusader12 on Apr 23, 2018 7:18:44 GMT -5
ADNP is good at the wrong things. Would be excellent at google, facebook, etc. These technology and social media efforts are just lipstick on a pig when it comes to HC athletics. The win loss record under his tenure is nothing short of pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by purplehaze on Apr 23, 2018 8:11:40 GMT -5
We have no chance of ever succeeding at a legitimate D.1 level until we 'appear' as one. Now that has been taken care of finally. Next up is the administration (and I am referring to Fr. B and Ann McD) to self-examine why we are consistently behind Colgate, Lehigh and Bucknell in most sports.If they are blind to this reality, ADNP must take their blinders off, and figure this thing out.
|
|
|
Post by ncaam on Apr 23, 2018 9:04:31 GMT -5
ADNP has other issues to focus on at the moment including his next posting.
|
|
|
Post by bigfan on Apr 23, 2018 9:42:35 GMT -5
ADNP is a good AD, the problem is the people on this board who know nothing about running a athletic department. If the AD gets help from the administration we will improve in all sports.
|
|
|
Post by alum on Apr 23, 2018 9:48:20 GMT -5
I really don't want to get into this discussion but, here, I am.
1. Stop with the talk of hiring an amateur alum as AD. 2. I will take the word of people here that there are kids who HC has refused to admit who have played at PL and Ivy schools. We can't have this both ways. HCpride and others are complaining that serious students don't want to go to HC because the admissions stats are not strong enough. Wouldn't admitting these kids drive them down further?
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Apr 23, 2018 10:40:05 GMT -5
I really don't want to get into this discussion but, here, I am. 2. I will take the word of people here that there are kids who HC has refused to admit who have played at PL and Ivy schools. We can't have this both ways. HCpride and others are complaining that serious students don't want to go to HC because the admissions stats are not strong enough. Wouldn't admitting these kids drive them down further? Sort of. The admission stats show that the brighter academic students aren't currently attending HC at nearly the rate they are at BC, Villanova, etc. The data (class rank, SAT/ACT score) is clear and widely available. (Of course this does, in turn, send a message to the academically-minded prospective applicants considering Catholic schools who frequently begin their search with a look at Naviance.)
On a different topic and relative to student-athletes: We simply do not have the data to show that a critical mass of academically rejected student-athletes subsequently attend IVY or rival PL - causing our teams to put up some pretty awful W-Ls. On its face, it does seem like a far-fetched excuse. It is far more likely (and hopefully this will change with Coach Chesney) that we are just not the choice for the top qualifying DI athletes. This, IMHO is actually why we are having some pretty awful athletic years lately.
|
|
|
Post by rickii on Apr 23, 2018 10:41:13 GMT -5
What a ridiculous thread.
Pine has been and continues to be the BEST AD Holy Cross has had EVER....including Ron Perry Sr. ! Thanks to 3 decades PLUS of ineptitude and ignorance by a steady succession of incredibly miscast 'leadership', Holy Cross decayed into self destruction across all fronts of it's athletic landscape. And his awful recent errors aside, we finally have a President ( not some lightweight that Fordham or Gonzaga didn't want anymore ), along with 2-3 key BOT's who want to raise a sunken ship....THANK GAWD !
And a couple of you just don't get how bad, how far behind, how critical the situation was when Pine was hired. You just don't get how massive an overhaul was needed. You think this all gets done in a measly 4 years....after 30-35 years of TOTAL neglect ? You think we're all caught up ? NOT EVEN CLOSE !!! IMO, we're maybe HALF WAY in the process at this moment TO JUST BEING CONSISTANTLY COMPETITIVE ANNUALLY ! Heck, we need a directed campaign for a near total rehab of Fitton Field !
BTW, how long before you same people throw Chesney under the bus, eh ? 2 years....3 years ? BULLETIN for you....he'll need a minimum of 4 years, got it ? In case you've missed it, he inherited a cultural and operational mess.
Is Pine perfect or exempt from mistakes ? NO ! Is he the best thing to happen to HC Athletics in like ever ? YES !
Now go ahead and resume your nonsense....
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Apr 23, 2018 10:52:12 GMT -5
Rick, I suggest you read Caro's post regarding Pine's hires. It's not pretty.
Also, Pine's handling of the Gilmore firing and Chesney hiring was very poor, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Apr 23, 2018 11:24:20 GMT -5
On a different topic and relative to student-athletes: We simply do not have the data to show that a critical mass of academically rejected student-athletes subsequently attend IVY or rival PL - causing our teams to put up some pretty awful W-Ls. On its face, it does seem like a far-fetched excuse. It is far more likely (and hopefully some will change with Coach Chesney) that we are just not the choice for the top qualifying DI athletes. This, IMHO is actually why we are having some pretty awful athletic years lately.
"we" don't have any data We have stories from various coaches talking about multiple players who HC recruited, who did not get admitted to HC and wind up playing against HC for our conference rivals I am not sure if anyone has prepared the data for -what percentage of recruited athletes don't get admitted to the school and - what percentage of those not admitted are varsity athletes at other PL schools Maybe/hopefully someone has analyzed these points and can shed light on the matter Because of the anecdotal nature of the information we do have, we don't know if this is a critical mass or not. This could be one, ten, or fifty athletes per year. We do know it has been mentioned by coaches from different sports. HC not being the choice for top qualifying athletes is a completely different, although valid question
|
|
|
Post by ncaam on Apr 23, 2018 14:41:45 GMT -5
We are certain of at least one. An honor student at Laff
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Apr 23, 2018 14:48:57 GMT -5
Also, as far as recruited athletes we don't have any data indicating the number or % of HC student athletes who did not get admitted to other PL/ IVY schools but were accepted to HC. Might their be some? I first heard these tales of student athletes getting admitted to IVY or other top quality schools but refused admission to HC 50+ years ago back in the 60's. I guess some things never change. Draw your own conclusions.. Lafayette, Colgate, and Bucknell - as well as HC - have their stories about athletes who were admitted at one of the other schools and not admitted by their own school.
|
|