|
|
Post by moose1970 on Sept 13, 2018 17:18:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by rickii on Sept 13, 2018 18:08:55 GMT -5
ZZZZzzzz….old news moose....we all see these stories annually.
|
|
|
|
Post by moose1970 on Sept 13, 2018 20:51:40 GMT -5
ZZZZzzzz….old news moose....we all see these stories annually. |
|
|
|
Post by moose1970 on Sept 13, 2018 20:52:43 GMT -5
just glad to hear that i am helping you get some much needed beauty rest.
pax,
|
|
|
|
Post by cruskater31 on Sept 14, 2018 7:20:08 GMT -5
Thanks for posting Moose. We do see similar tales from newspapers covering area FCS schools, but I was pleasantly surprised. The article read like a suspense novel--building up anti FCS vs. FBS sentiment in the first portion before examining the reasons FCS schools want to play FBS opponents. I think Teddy Capsis expressed a good point when he said the BC game was something he looked forward to from the moment he was recruited. I am sure we will all expend much energy (as we do yearly in the off-season) debating whether or not a recruit is more likely to choose HC because of the "showcase" games vs. FBS opponents or to choose Hahvahd with no FBS games, no schollies, and no playoffs. Thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Sept 14, 2018 9:39:13 GMT -5
Thanks for that link. Moose. Nice to see an objective outside source with both serious discussion and supporting data.
|
|
|
|
Post by moose1970 on Sept 19, 2018 12:45:17 GMT -5
hope that i am posting this correctly.
below is 2nd article in San Francisco Chronicle Sporting Green series on "cupcake games"
FYI,
Readers weigh in on college football ‘cupcake games’ - SFChronicle.com
|
|
|
|
Post by matunuck on Sept 19, 2018 13:09:09 GMT -5
Please stop all the hand-wringing on FBS-FCS. Play the game, move on, do better next time. Good grief.
|
|
|
|
Post by moose1970 on Sept 19, 2018 13:34:19 GMT -5
Please stop all the hand-wringing on FBS-FCS. Play the game, move on, do better next time. Good grief. problem is that we have little/no chance to "do better next time" for reasons stated in prior posts. let's give our players and coaches a chance to play football games. this issue is not going away if we continue to schedule and play these "games". |
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Sept 19, 2018 13:42:41 GMT -5
UConn, UMass, Army would definitely be “games.” A resurgent Holy Cross team against an off-year BC team would also be a “game.” Navy, maybe not so much and probably not Syracuse.
I think we got more signed (correction: "dinged", darned auto correct) up against Yale than BC.
|
|
|
|
Post by joe on Sept 19, 2018 14:35:20 GMT -5
For HC, I don’t really think these games are about the money, but on the other hand I’ve I had my fill of this conversation. I’m frankly impressed by how anyone can be so “against” these games, which the vast majority love, especially players and coaches. I can understand ambivalence or mild dislike, but this is kind of silly.
|
|
|
|
Post by matunuck on Sept 19, 2018 14:43:16 GMT -5
I am happy with will will play Navy and hopefully Tulane and the like down the line.
|
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Sept 19, 2018 14:48:14 GMT -5
I am very confident that while most of the D-IA games HC has scheduled over the coming years are indeed focused on money. BC was scheduled first by Dick Regan for the history/tradition, first; with the ancillary benefit of money. UConn and any future UMass game, now that they are both D-IA, are probably money first; a reasonable (30%-50%) chance of winning, second; proximity, third. Since Syracuse historically beat us like a drum even in our best years, that's probably close to 100% for money. Playing Army would be equal parts tradition; a great way to get alums together down in metro NY; a reasonable chance of winning; and, of course, $$$$.
As I've posted previously former head coach Gilmore told me if we had to play D-IA teams, his first choice was UConn due to proximity and being able to beat them. Second choice was Army. Don't recall talking about UMass but they may have still been D-IAA when I spoke with him. BC and Syracuse were, as I recall, considered a bridge too far. I don't think Navy was even on the horizon but I can see the powers that be want us to play them, not just for money but because they are a fellow Patriot League school for all but football.
Gentlemen, we can discuss this 'til the cows come home but these games are a fact of life. You can like the idea and the challenge and the money or you can hate it because of fears for life and limb. But, love it or hate it, it's here and will remain as long as we play D-IAA football with scholarships. Holy Cross, like most of our peer schools (exception being Ivies), need the money to offset the high cost of running these programs. We will still lose money each year . . . . . just less of it when we have a stream of D-IA money coming in each year.
|
|
|
|
Post by inhocsigno on Sept 19, 2018 14:52:02 GMT -5
I am very confident that while most of the D-IA games HC has scheduled over the coming years are indeed focused on money. BC was scheduled first by Dick Regan for the history/tradition, first; with the ancillary benefit of money. UConn and any future UMass game, now that they are both D-IA, are probably money first; a reasonable (30%-50%) chance of winning, second; proximity, third. Since Syracuse historically beat us like a drum even in our best years, that's probably close to 100% for money. Playing Army would be equal parts tradition; a great way to get alums together down in metro NY; a reasonable chance of winning; and, of course, $$$$. As I've posted previously former head coach Gilmore told me if we had to play D-IA teams, his first choice was UConn due to proximity and being able to beat them. Second choice was Army. Don't recall talking about UMass but they may have still been D-IAA when I spoke with him. BC and Syracuse were, as I recall, considered a bridge too far. I don't think Navy was even on the horizon but I can see the powers that be want us to play them, not just for money but because they are a fellow Patriot League school for all but football. Gentlemen, we can discuss this 'til the cows come home but these games are a fact of life. You can like the idea and the challenge and the money or you can hate it because of fears for life and limb. But, love it or hate it, it's here and will remain as long as we play D-IAA football with scholarships. Holy Cross, like most of our peer schools (exception being Ivies), need the money to offset the high cost of running these programs. We will still lose money each year . . . . . just less of it when we have a stream of D-IA money coming in each year. You should not say anyone is afraid. You may be tagged as unreasonable. I wouldn't know. |
|
|
|
Post by joe on Sept 19, 2018 14:56:04 GMT -5
From what I've heard from other football alum, some of whom are our most highly decorated, invested, and involved, it's really not primarily about the money for HC, but about the idea of us actually standing head to head with the big boys from time to time. Maybe that's a different agenda that some or most FCS schools but that's what I can tell you. In fact just recently someone told me he was getting sick of hearing people talk about these games in the context of "HC needing the money." HC is just fine, and HC football is just fine, financially speaking. Anyway take it or leave it.
Agree with sader1970 in the sense that this is just how it's going to be for the foreseeable future, so it really doesn't matter what anyone thinks, although certainly go ahead and keep discussing it - free country.
|
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Sept 19, 2018 14:56:05 GMT -5
Well, you never know. Different sport but you may recall that BC's Al Skinner didn't want to play HC in basketball anymore because we played "too rough" or words to that effect and was afraid his delicate players were getting hurt by the tough Crusaders. So, maybe some D-IA football teams might not want to play us either after looking at how our RB Peter Oliver hurt two tacklers in the Yale game when he ran over them.  |
|
|
|
Post by matunuck on Sept 19, 2018 15:02:12 GMT -5
Behind the scenes Navy was a big of advocate of the PL bringing back schollies so they could rotate games with the league. Good for them. Unlike, say, Georgetown and regularly scheduling basketball games.
|
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Sept 19, 2018 15:52:56 GMT -5
To the extent it matters, Colgate (close loss v the PL presumptive champ) and Yale (overtime win v the defending Ivy champs) were much better football games than the predictably one-sided blowout v BC. (I think I am on firm footing here) I am wondering if we have ever before played a game wherein the opposing coach pulled out his stars midway thru the 1st quarter (up by 21) and still cruised to a 48 point victory (with 2nd and 3rd stringers and freshman redshirts). Even the games I watched v Flutie's nationally ranked teams were competitive for a half and BC's stars stayed in thru the 3rd quarter (if not longer). As far as the future goes, if we dominate the PL (blowouts in almost all PL games) and have the kind of team that can win two or three games in the FCS playoffs and BC is way way down I can see a HC-BC game that is competitive for a full quarter or two. If that is somebody's goal for our program. As far as Syracuse goes, I did watch a closely contested SBU-Syracuse game a few years ago (2012) that was awesome. But SBU was up (legit D-1 line, speed everywhere, this guy, and beat Army easily that year) and Syracuse was down a bit. I suspect there was a miscalculation about SBU's program on the part of Army and Syracuse when they scheduled the game. So those things can happen. |
|
|
|
Post by moose1970 on Sept 19, 2018 15:55:14 GMT -5
I am very confident that while most of the D-IA games HC has scheduled over the coming years are indeed focused on money. BC was scheduled first by Dick Regan for the history/tradition, first; with the ancillary benefit of money. UConn and any future UMass game, now that they are both D-IA, are probably money first; a reasonable (30%-50%) chance of winning, second; proximity, third. Since Syracuse historically beat us like a drum even in our best years, that's probably close to 100% for money. Playing Army would be equal parts tradition; a great way to get alums together down in metro NY; a reasonable chance of winning; and, of course, $$$$. As I've posted previously former head coach Gilmore told me if we had to play D-IA teams, his first choice was UConn due to proximity and being able to beat them. Second choice was Army. Don't recall talking about UMass but they may have still been D-IAA when I spoke with him. BC and Syracuse were, as I recall, considered a bridge too far. I don't think Navy was even on the horizon but I can see the powers that be want us to play them, not just for money but because they are a fellow Patriot League school for all but football. Gentlemen, we can discuss this 'til the cows come home but these games are a fact of life. You can like the idea and the challenge and the money or you can hate it because of fears for life and limb. But, love it or hate it, it's here and will remain as long as we play D-IAA football with scholarships. Holy Cross, like most of our peer schools (exception being Ivies), need the money to offset the high cost of running these programs. We will still lose money each year . . . . . just less of it when we have a stream of D-IA money coming in each year. this is not a fait accompli.. i raised the issue of continuing to play these games in the hope that HC will revise its future football schedule by dropping games v BC, Syracuse or any football program devoted to big business football. if we continue to get flattened by these opponents like what happened v BC this year (no fault of our players or coaches) then the thrill will soon wear off. there is no need to wait for that to happen. |
|
|
|
Post by inhocsigno on Sept 19, 2018 16:05:29 GMT -5
Quitter
|
|
|
|
Post by hc80 on Sept 19, 2018 16:18:31 GMT -5
Hey Moose....it is one or two games per year....and BC is on the schedule in 2020 and it is not clear that there will be any thereafter....lighten up! The kids want to play them, we need the cash, it is a good proposition. Yes, we know the score for the most part.... were you in attendance at the BC game? It was a terrific environment - so, until the student-athletes say no....I say go ahead. I would limit it to BC, the military academies, UConn and UMass for the most part. And with this coach, in due time, it won't be 28-0 at the end of the first quarter.
|
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Sept 19, 2018 16:55:09 GMT -5
So a week after we were "flattened" by Boston College, the Crusaders go out and knock off the defending Ivy League champion who was also picked to win that league pre-season. This was the first time that the Yale football program, which has fielded a team since Reconstruction, lost a game in Worcester, Massachusetts. Maybe there were some benefits of playing the BC game aside from a feel-good experience for the loyal purple fan base. The narrative that these "bodybag" games overly demoralize a team into future poor play, and that they result in a higher rate of injuries than usual, is false IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by Non Alum Dave on Sept 19, 2018 17:20:31 GMT -5
IMHO, the student athletes are the most important part of any athletic program......and, if they want to play these teams...just sayin
|
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Sept 19, 2018 19:07:30 GMT -5
Moose, I certainly see your point playing against Syracuse but not as sure about BC despite the score of a couple of weeks ago ("you had to be there," as they say). But, for the sake or argument, say we again discontinue playing BC - not that it is even planned to be a regular annual thing, only occasionally - I would be interested in your thoughts:
1. Who, if any, D-IA teams should we play?
2. If we play no D-IA teams, what D-IAA teams should we play instead?*
3. If no D-IA teams on the schedule, do you feel we should de-emphasize football by:
A. Reduce the number of scholarships?
B. Eliminate football athletic scholarships?
4. If HC keeps the same number of scholarships and eliminate D-IA "pay" games, how do you make up the additional revenue shortfall? (Understanding the reason for increasing the number of scholarships was to be able to schedule D-IA "pay" games)
* If you think we should play California schools, how would we pay for the much greater travel costs?
Caution: If your answer to 3B is "yes," be prepared to either say we drop down to D-II or D-III football and give up playing all teams we've played for decades upon decades and if you think the crowds in Fitton are small now, you'll hear crickets. If you believe we can go back to no football scholarships but stay at D-IAA, games against Colgate, Dartmouth, Lehigh will look similar to the BC results of a couple of weeks ago. If your answer to 3A is "yes," be prepared to have the success of Georgetown within the Patriot League.
Having played football at Holy Cross, I know that this is a subject that you have real interest in and your posts have contributed to the discussion and have helped the rest of us to not take things for granted or assumed things because "we've always done it this way."
|
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Sept 19, 2018 19:22:03 GMT -5
I thought we already gave the max number of scholarships allowed by the Patriot League. No?
|
|
