Give me a compelling reason why Gilmore should be retained..

Ask someone at Lehigh how they answer that.

In principle, yes, but I have heard the claim made, though, as recently as the 2016 basketball coaches night event (in casual conversation among fans), that there have been recruits that CTG was unable to get in through Holy Cross Admissions, but ended up playing elsewhere in the Patriot League.

Sounds fair.

Those who are eagerly anticipating a new coach next year are in for a disappointment...

Is this your opinion or based on real info. Substantiate please.

Generally speaking, there is one low-low band recruit, perhaps two.

The bands are as follows:

High band within one standard deviation of the school's overall AI.  (68 percent of students are within one standard deviation.)

Medium band between one and two standard deviations.  (95 percent of students are within two standard deviations.)

Low band, between two and two and a half deviations.  (99.7 percent of students are within two and a half standard deviations)

Low low band, between two and a half standard deviations and the floor (Floor is AI of 168 in the PL.)
 
If HC admitted a class of 600 students, about two would be below the low-low band.

It would be possible that if HC's overall AI is so low, that there is compression between the lower bands and the floor. That is, the more than two and a half standard deviations would be below the AI floor, in effect, wiping out the low low band.  IMO, that would be a painful concession on HC's part.

 

The PL's application of the AI is, paraphrasing, a mystery wrapped in an enigma.  The Ivy's application of an AI is simply a mystery.

Applying the Ivy's AI methodology to the PL:  for football, the average AI of all recruited football players must fall within one standard deviation of the AI for the school.  If the Holy Cross' AI for the school was 200, and one standard deviation was 187, the football team's average AI would need to achieve at least 187,  Ideally, for recruiting purposes, you would like to have several recruits with AIs of 210 or 215, because their score would offset the recruit with an AI of 179.

In the Ivy's, the AI of all recruited athletes must be within one standard deviation of the school's AI.  Looking at Harvard specifically, former basketball coach Sullivan was told all his recruits had to have AI scores within one standard deviation.  Supposedly, with Coach Amaker, this was relaxed, and  Amaker could recruit players with an AI below one standard deviation.  Admissions and the Athletic Dept would use recruits in other sports with high AI scores to offset.  Amaker would also have one or two recruits destined for prolonged 'pine time', but who very likely had very high AI scores.

CTG's complaints may be legitimate -- and one would never know unless one could examine how a recruit with an AI of 170 fit with the football recruiting profiles of HC and other PL schools -- or they may simply be sour grapes. E.g., HC Admissions used the high AI score of a field hockey recruit to offset the low AI score of a basketball recruit, rather than a football recruit.  My sense is that the A! average for all recruited athletes being within one standard deviation is the higher norm.
________________________
Edited to add.

I'll speculate and say a/the reason for the four bands in football (the PL has bands for basketball also) is to preclude schools from stocking the football team with less intellectually gifted students, and offsetting that, for AI purposes, with members of women's squash, golf, fencing, etc. who have more robust academic credentials and much higher AI scores.
 

Interesting that both announcers said it was clear that the team kept playing until the very end today and throughout the season. Today was ugly for many reasons, but I do not believe the team quit on CTG or any of the coaches. That us (1) an easy excuse for a poor game and (2) an attempt to give greater validity to the need for a coaching change. HC may well need new coaches, but IMO it is not because the teams "quit" on them.

Sometimes a change is needed (and best) for BOTH parties; I have a feeling that might be the case here. I doubt CTG is feeling too much job satisfaction these days.

You may call me a dreamer, but I still see no reason why this program can't be a perennial PL contender, and with a consistent level of success draw 10-13K fans a game. I also think the current talent level may be a bit better than the results are displaying. A shakeup might really jumpstart things.

We have talent but not enough size and speed. Just replay the game and give it the "eye test." Sorry but if we're going to improve we can't keep B.S.ing. Our current team and coaches would have been 7-4, 8-3ish back in 2008 or 2009 for our usual 2nd or 3rd place in the league but the players in the PL have gotten bigger and faster. With roster limits every recruiting decision must be 100% spot on. We used to just stockpile aid-based athletes Ivy-style and let the cream rise up and things would work out plus or minus. I don't see that our recruiting strategy has reflected the requisite adaptations to a new scholarship era. Perhaps this is owing to a lack of previous scholarship recruiting experience by current staff from the top down? To me it seems the talent has improved slightly but not tremendously, whereas 'gate, FU, and Lehigh seem to be landing more studs.