|
|
Post by sader1970 on Jun 22, 2022 7:13:37 GMT -5
And here I thought the main reason was to increase our enrollment of international students . . . . . . . Canada.
|
|
|
|
Post by matunuck on Jun 22, 2022 8:08:51 GMT -5
If it is true that donors are largely going to fund it because they have chosen to do so, really don't see the outrage. The rink is very dated, and we do have a women's team that plays in a top conference unlike most of our other sports. PP, is the renovation, in whatever form it takes, supposed to be mostly funded by hockey-oriented donors or do I have that wrong? I believe the current chair of the HC board (and of EcoLab) is behind the move to upgrade the rink. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_M._Baker_Jr. |
|
|
|
Post by alum on Jun 22, 2022 8:55:38 GMT -5
If it is true that donors are largely going to fund it because they have chosen to do so, really don't see the outrage. The rink is very dated, and we do have a women's team that plays in a top conference unlike most of our other sports. PP, is the renovation, in whatever form it takes, supposed to be mostly funded by hockey-oriented donors or do I have that wrong? I believe the current chair of the HC board (and of EcoLab) is behind the move to upgrade the rink. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_M._Baker_Jr. No outrage. Just concerned that it is not a good investment. If the gifts to support the rink are gifts that otherwise would not be made, than a renovation can be justified. It is the job of advancement to guide donors to gifts that support an institution's needs while respecting that ultimately the donor decides. Let's assume the gift is $15 million. Placed in the endowment, it generates $650,000 or every year to be used for financial aid, faculty salaries, or 9 scholarships to make the baseball and softball teams more competitive. |
|
|
|
Post by matunuck on Jun 22, 2022 9:22:35 GMT -5
We will have to see who the donors are, but they could very well be new ones (or have given very little to HC in the past) particularly interested in funding this. Donors have all sorts of reasons for funding things that I believe could be better dedicated to other uses. Also, it is often the case that new donors continue to give and stay engaged financially with the college. Again, I don't know how this will be financed. But we have chosen to play D-I hockey and have our women join Hockey East. The rink simply isn't a legitimate D-I rink. If the school doesn't want to play D-I, we should drop the sport to the club level.
|
|
|
|
Post by alum on Jun 22, 2022 10:47:12 GMT -5
We will have to see who the donors are, but they could very well be new ones (or have given very little to HC in the past) particularly interested in funding this. Donors have all sorts of reasons for funding things that I believe could be better dedicated to other uses. Also, it is often the case that new donors continue to give and stay engaged financially with the college. Again, I don't know how this will be financed. But we have chosen to play D-I hockey and have our women join Hockey East. The rink simply isn't a legitimate D-I rink. If the school doesn't want to play D-I, we should drop the sport to the club level. I think that they do want to play D1 hockey. My problem, as expressed elsewhere, is that the allocation of 36 scholarships in a sport that most of our league does not play is killing us in all sports except football and basketball. |
|
|
|
Post by matunuck on Jun 22, 2022 13:10:55 GMT -5
Just me but spending upwards of $110 million for a PAC is highly questionable.
|
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Jun 22, 2022 13:13:06 GMT -5
So, the plan is for the College to secure eight figures worth of gifts from its most qualified donors to renovate a rink for a sport that is not contested in our principal league and is most appealing to students from a geographic region from which we are already overenrolled and to which it is committing 36 scholarships while starving other sports? If there was unlimited funds, I would say go for it, but I am not sure it makes sense. And I think college hockey is a great sport . "Precision of thought, economy of speech." -Anthony S. Fauci '62. You made a lot of clear points with little waste. |
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Jun 22, 2022 13:16:52 GMT -5
Just me but spending upwards of $110 million for a PAC is highly questionable. I doubt it would have been attempted without the named sponsor and then inflation in construction costs kicked in. I hope Mr. Prior is still with us to enjoy this beautiful facility. |
|
|
|
Post by alum on Jun 22, 2022 14:54:12 GMT -5
So, the plan is for the College to secure eight figures worth of gifts from its most qualified donors to renovate a rink for a sport that is not contested in our principal league and is most appealing to students from a geographic region from which we are already overenrolled and to which it is committing 36 scholarships while starving other sports? If there was unlimited funds, I would say go for it, but I am not sure it makes sense. And I think college hockey is a great sport . "Precision of thought, economy of speech." -Anthony S. Fauci '62. You made a lot of clear points with little waste. Doing my best. I think that the use of a run on sentence can build momentum for an argument. I'm not sure it is a recognzied rhetorical device, but I like it. |
|
|
|
Post by bfoley82 on Jun 22, 2022 17:36:49 GMT -5
If it is true that donors are largely going to fund it because they have chosen to do so, really don't see the outrage. The rink is very dated, and we do have a women's team that plays in a top conference unlike most of our other sports. PP, is the renovation, in whatever form it takes, supposed to be mostly funded by hockey-oriented donors or do I have that wrong? I believe the current chair of the HC board (and of EcoLab) is behind the move to upgrade the rink. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_M._Baker_Jr. No outrage. Just concerned that it is not a good investment. If the gifts to support the rink are gifts that otherwise would not be made, than a renovation can be justified. It is the job of advancement to guide donors to gifts that support an institution's needs while respecting that ultimately the donor decides. Let's assume the gift is $15 million. Placed in the endowment, it generates $650,000 or every year to be used for financial aid, faculty salaries, or 9 scholarships to make the baseball and softball teams more competitive. Men's and Women's Hockey are MUCH closer to being national champs than Baseball or Softball will ever be. |
|
|
|
Post by alumni111 on Jun 22, 2022 20:21:35 GMT -5
New BOT chair, effective 7/1/22:
|
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Jun 23, 2022 0:00:25 GMT -5
NCAA Division One doesn’t provide too many shortcuts to national championship contention. Hockey and FCS football are two where only a fraction of all D-1 schools compete. Field Hockey is another one that is somewhat regional, but doesn’t have the spectator or media interest that hockey and football do.
OTH, even early round participation in March Madness may generate as much positive spin off for a school as a deep NCAA tournament run in hockey or FCS football.
HC has been smart to increase funding in FB in response to actually succeeding. I hope the school realizes even the snazziest rink can't put the biscuit in the basket on it's own in hockey. If there is only so much money to spend, spending it on coaching is probably a better investment.
|
|
aaa8316
Crusader Century Club
Posts: 114
|
Post by aaa8316 on Jun 23, 2022 9:59:36 GMT -5
The problem with HC, as I and numerous others have stated on here previously, is that they continually try to be everything to everyone. Hockey is no different.
We have two D1 programs, funded (kinda) well in the scholarship budget line -- but absolutely nowhere else.
- Coaches salaries, equipment, non-conference travel and recruiting budgets fall well behind our competition.
And we have WITHOUT QUESTION the worst rink in Division 1 hockey. It's not even close.
But I keep reading about new turf fields for other HC sports, a new track, upgrading the soccer stadium, etc, etc.
So to the post yesterday about Hockey "starving" the support for other programs, perhaps if HC stopped the insanity of having 27 Varsity sports, some programs such as Hockey, Lacrosse, Soccer might be centrally funded more adequately (vs. the continued pressure and reliance on alums to step up) to actually compete for championships in their respective leagues. What a novel thought...
|
|
|
|
Post by A Clock Tower Purple on Jun 23, 2022 10:39:18 GMT -5
As I've said in the past, the only reason a school with an enrollment of just 3,100 fields 27 D1 sports is to reel in full-pay students so parents get to brag their kid is a D1 athlete at cocktail parties. It's all by design, and why participation trumps winning at HC.
|
|
|
|
Post by hc17 on Jun 23, 2022 11:08:03 GMT -5
It's tough to justify the school sponsoring 27 varsity sports on a population of 3,100 students. Not hard to imagine that Admissions leveraged these sports programs to increase diversity across the board (racial, geographical, etc). If Admissions casts a wider net moving forward, perhaps there will be greater scrutiny on these programs.
|
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Jun 23, 2022 11:29:31 GMT -5
It's tough to justify the school sponsoring 27 varsity sports on a population of 3,100 students. Not hard to imagine that Admissions leveraged these sports programs to increase diversity across the board (racial, geographical, etc). If Admissions casts a wider net moving forward, perhaps there will be greater scrutiny on these programs. Very few, if any of the minor sport at Holy Cross do anything to move the needle on the kind of diversity college admissions departments are looking for. Maybe Track & Field. The rest for the most part are what people would refer to as "country club sports". And without athletics, I think Holy Cross does fine anyway recruiting students of color and casting a relatively wide geographical net across the US. |
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Jun 23, 2022 11:33:09 GMT -5
The problem with HC, as I and numerous others have stated on here previously, is that they continually try to be everything to everyone. Hockey is no different. We have two D1 programs, funded (kinda) well in the scholarship budget line -- but absolutely nowhere else. - Coaches salaries, equipment, non-conference travel and recruiting budgets fall well behind our competition. And we have WITHOUT QUESTION the worst rink in Division 1 hockey. It's not even close. But I keep reading about new turf fields for other HC sports, a new track, upgrading the soccer stadium, etc, etc. So to the post yesterday about Hockey "starving" the support for other programs, perhaps if HC stopped the insanity of having 27 Varsity sports, some programs such as Hockey, Lacrosse, Soccer might be centrally funded more adequately (vs. the continued pressure and reliance on alums to step up) to actually compete for championships in their respective leagues. What a novel thought... A lot of track alum are actually very upset about the Luth. Many were bilked into donating funds under the promise that the facility would include a legitimate indoor track. Apparently Kavanaugh, one of the most mild-mannered people on campus, was absolutely fuming. |
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Jun 23, 2022 11:38:50 GMT -5
The problem with HC, as I and numerous others have stated on here previously, is that they continually try to be everything to everyone. Hockey is no different. We have two D1 programs, funded (kinda) well in the scholarship budget line -- but absolutely nowhere else. - Coaches salaries, equipment, non-conference travel and recruiting budgets fall well behind our competition. And we have WITHOUT QUESTION the worst rink in Division 1 hockey. It's not even close. But I keep reading about new turf fields for other HC sports, a new track, upgrading the soccer stadium, etc, etc. So to the post yesterday about Hockey "starving" the support for other programs, perhaps if HC stopped the insanity of having 27 Varsity sports, some programs such as Hockey, Lacrosse, Soccer might be centrally funded more adequately (vs. the continued pressure and reliance on alums to step up) to actually compete for championships in their respective leagues. What a novel thought... Yes, if the College decided to keep those programs and drop other ones you didn't mention. Let's go back to making a list of the sports the college should care about and fund and those that they should either drop or make a token effort (i.e., varsity sports in name only, really club). |
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Jun 23, 2022 11:39:41 GMT -5
I was shocked that so little in the Luth was provided for track and field. Maybe it is way of the future. My high school (Bergen Catholic, a NJ sports factory) sacrificed their track to put in a better football stadium. They can't host home meets because what they call a track now has only TWO lanes around the 400 meter track with straight-away lanes on the far side of the field for practice. At least HC still has a legit all-weather track.
|
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Jun 23, 2022 12:16:09 GMT -5
I was shocked that so little in the Luth was provided for track and field. Maybe it is way of the future. My high school (Bergen Catholic, a NJ sports factory) sacrificed their track to put in a better football stadium. They can't host home meets because what they call a track now has only TWO lanes around the 400 meter track with straight-away lanes on the far side of the field for practice. At least HC still has a legit all-weather track. Dumb. And I'm sure 60% of the football players at Bergen are also on the track team. |
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Jun 23, 2022 12:30:36 GMT -5
My high school was on a postage stamp lot. The track team was league champion using a public park a half mile away. Team members could walk back to school after practice but were expected to run at a good pace to practice. By the time I got there I was already pooped.🙂
My thinking on minor sports that are the usual suspects for cutting teams, Golf, Tennis and Swimming is that they pay for themselves overall and any move to cut one or more would be an unforced error by a college seeking to present itself favorably to broaden it's appeal nationally.
Teams would most likely be reinstated but not before a bunch of ill will and negative press was generated. A temptation might be to cut men's teams only to help with Title 9 and compete more favorably with non-football schools.
Offering a sport for one gender only when the other gender gets to play at peer schools would be another unforced error that would likely get reversed after causing damage also.
Initiatives like Kit's emphasis on youth clinics are a good start at trying to inject life into HC Athletics without destroying teams and their constituencies in an attempt to improve.
|
|
aaa8316
Crusader Century Club
Posts: 114
|
Post by aaa8316 on Jun 23, 2022 12:49:37 GMT -5
As I've said in the past, the only reason a school with an enrollment of just 3,100 fields 27 D1 sports is to reel in full-pay students so parents get to brag their kid is a D1 athlete at cocktail parties. It's all by design, and why participation trumps winning at HC. You're 100% correct, but as an alum that would prefer if HC actually invested in winning vs participation in Varsity Athletics, it makes no sense to me. See here: www.holycross.edu/admissions-aid/what-we-look-for/enrollment-facts-and-figures- 7,000+ applicants (standard every year for HC) - Approx. 750 admitted in each incoming freshman class. So you're telling me the College is so desperate for full-pay admits that they need Athletic programs to scour the world to find them? I'm sorry, I don't buy it. 6,250 other applicants leads me to believe there are 100's of other full-pay options for the student body annually to help balance the books. |
|
aaa8316
Crusader Century Club
Posts: 114
|
Post by aaa8316 on Jun 23, 2022 12:51:53 GMT -5
The problem with HC, as I and numerous others have stated on here previously, is that they continually try to be everything to everyone. Hockey is no different. We have two D1 programs, funded (kinda) well in the scholarship budget line -- but absolutely nowhere else. - Coaches salaries, equipment, non-conference travel and recruiting budgets fall well behind our competition. And we have WITHOUT QUESTION the worst rink in Division 1 hockey. It's not even close. But I keep reading about new turf fields for other HC sports, a new track, upgrading the soccer stadium, etc, etc. So to the post yesterday about Hockey "starving" the support for other programs, perhaps if HC stopped the insanity of having 27 Varsity sports, some programs such as Hockey, Lacrosse, Soccer might be centrally funded more adequately (vs. the continued pressure and reliance on alums to step up) to actually compete for championships in their respective leagues. What a novel thought... Yes, if the College decided to keep those programs and drop other ones you didn't mention. Let's go back to making a list of the sports the college should care about and fund and those that they should either drop or make a token effort (i.e., varsity sports in name only, really club). This was done and approved by the Board in the last year. Reference the Strategic Plan that our previous wizz-bang AD put together. |
|
|
|
Post by hc17 on Jun 23, 2022 13:22:30 GMT -5
Assuming the BoT commit to an upgraded rink, is there a comparable D1 rink that we can reference? It appears that based on some of the limitations listed in the thread, we'd still have an inferior rink to the D1 programs in New England.
|
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Jun 23, 2022 14:08:17 GMT -5
If we have a rink that highlights and serves the needs of current and future HC hockey players, coaches and fans, it may not matter if there are some others that are superior to it.
|
|
