|
Post by showcase on Sept 18, 2004 15:27:09 GMT -5
There's just no excuse for this type of performance. The players were not prepared to play, it didn't appear that the best guys were in place at key positions.
This team stinks from the top.
|
|
|
Post by showcase on Sept 18, 2004 15:29:51 GMT -5
Who needs a 2d option at RB? This team needs a passing game, not another option at RB - Sarin did just fine, despite the deck stacked against him.
Who's to blame for this team coming into the season with no clear option at QB?
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,753
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Sept 18, 2004 15:31:14 GMT -5
If you run the option, you absolutely needs a second option to take pressure off Sarin. Colgate can send seven and eight every play next week if they think Sarin will do it all.
In the end, quarterbacks lead teams. Period. If they're doing poorly, it infects the rest of the team.
The problem is that GU can't go back to running with another senior QB and never build any experience at the position. It success in the 1990's was built on experienced QB's (Ward, Mont). Since the PL era, it has shifted among Paulus, Booth, Peterson, Paulus again, Peterson again, Turner, Peterson again, Allen, and Cangelosi.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Kurker on Sept 18, 2004 15:40:50 GMT -5
My name is Steven Kurker. I started at Noseguard on the 1978/79 team that went 7-1 and led the nation in NCAA D3 total offense. I was benched for the first half of the game we lost to the University of Rochester that year due to a minor curfew violation. We would have won the game if I started and finished or was put-in after the first quarter. The coaching staff could have punished me individually instead of punishing the whole team with a loss to blow our perfect season. I hope the I-AA coaching staff doesn't make the same or similar mistakes. Beat offenders up at practice...don't bench them. I went to the Lafyette game last week...1st time on campus for 20 years. Heard Federico and Coakley (82) were at a post-game shindig. I used to kick those two guy's buts at practice...nobody was tougher than the Boston bad-boy (except maybe Zimmerman). How about inviting me to after-game parties...stevenkurker@msn.com
|
|
|
Post by oldschoolfan on Sept 18, 2004 15:46:12 GMT -5
I don't know DFW and Showcase. It seems there are much bigger problems going on than second RB options. Clearly, the quarterback is a major piece. The last time that I remember there being a clear starter going into the season was in the JJ Mont era. Nonetheless, it appears that there are WAY bigger problems than these. From what I observed, before this game of course, there were some standout players on defense and there even seemed to be some chemistry building in the D (that opinion means nothing after today of course). The offense is a mess. The whole team is a mess. What needs to be done to correct this?? When was the last time that the team did not have this intangible aura of failure around it? The last time I remember there being a breath of fresh air in the program was when Dave Paulus came off the bench to resurrect the 2002 season...and that was very short lived! I am a Gtown fan forever, but I am also being realistic: what drastic measures need to be done? Fire people? Cut players? What now?? This loss is certainly just a testament to the fact that Gtown has not really progressed too much in the past several years. If you can disagree, I'd love to hear it. I know there are a couple kids out there with a lot of heart, and I know a few coaches in particular who try their best to prepare the team. But overall.....what now?!?
|
|
|
Post by glory days on Sept 18, 2004 15:52:28 GMT -5
i agree with showcase. why does it seem like we played better when we were in the MAAC...against the SAME TEAMS? Has Duquesne and Holy Cross gotten that much better? i dont think so. all everyone talked about for 5 years was getting to the patriot league so we could recuit better players and play better ball.
well, let me ask you: could this year's gtown team beat the gtown team of five years ago? i would say definitely not.
Are we more popular? attendance has stayed the same, at best.
are they a more exciting team? 2-15 with 3 ints sounds real exciting, if its the other teams QB.
If you ask this fan, building a new stadium shouldn't be our top priority. Maybe we should invest in some better recruiting or coaching. at the very least, a bigger tailpad for our QB. he's gonna need it.
|
|
|
Post by BostonHoya on Sept 18, 2004 16:04:34 GMT -5
I agree with Glory Days. How is it possible that a team that every single week is the best academic school on the field (with exception of playing Cornell last season), in the most recruitable city in the league (Worcester and Bethlehem are no DC), with the best opportunities for student athletes (how many senators and presidents went to Bucknell?) is a terrible football team amongst teams with the same number of scholarships (zero) and lesser academic reputations as sports institutions?
I'm a former player and alum, but let's be real: the difference between the 2004 team and a mediocre DIII is nonexistent. This is embarrassing. I felt good after week 1. Big blowout--except it was a big blowout against the lowest ranked team in the entire Sagarin ranking.
Thankfully, Coach Benson doesn't schedule Gettysbury, JHU or Catholic U any more because the Hoyas would lose to all 3 of them.
If playing like this is the plan down the road, let's concentrate on improving our US News ranking (which is down to #25, the lowest I can ever recall) and save the $$$ that we'll waste on the new stadium. The team that played today deserves nothing more than the high school level stadium at which they play.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Sept 18, 2004 16:11:51 GMT -5
I agree with Glory Days. How is it possible that a team that every single week is the best academic school on the field (with exception of playing Cornell last season), in the most recruitable city in the league (Worcester and Bethlehem are no DC), with the best opportunities for student athletes (how many senators and presidents went to Bucknell?) is a terrible football team amongst teams with the same number of scholarships (zero) and lesser academic reputations as sports institutions? How does basketball do it? Wait, they dont either.
|
|
|
Post by Lurking Dog on Sept 18, 2004 16:11:56 GMT -5
The team that played today deserves nothing more than the high school level stadium at which they play. Classy.
|
|
|
Post by BostonHoya on Sept 18, 2004 16:16:55 GMT -5
Gimme a break. I know this is a board of former players, alums and parents but this is a Division I football team. If you're gonna whine when someone tells it like it is and doesn't follow the party line, you are just demonstrating just how "D-III" this team still is. It's a high school stadium, the team is terrible and that's despite the "classy" acts of the program like hiring an offensive coordinator who got canned for encouraging his players to miss classes at Ohio State and got laughed out of football a few years back.
You want classy? How about a university that has gigantic financial problems because of bad financial moves and instead of paying its debt is building a football stadium for a football team that doesn't deserve it and a lacrosse/soccer team that do deserve it, but don't need it to win.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,753
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Sept 18, 2004 16:24:31 GMT -5
Remember, the university isn't building the facility--ALUMNI and PARENTS are.
Being the best academic school in a conference is no guarantee of success. Ask Northwestern, Baylor, or Vanderbilt.
Bring in a big city doesn't do it, either. If it were, Columbia would be a powerhouse.
Georgetown does not compete at the same level as a lot of PL schools. Lehigh packages aid for far more players than GU--in fact, Lehigh and Colgate spend more money on football than Georgetown does on scholarship basketball. As late as last year, GU spent one-third of what most PL schools spend on the sport.
One of the biggest draws is training and facilities. Unless and until the Multi-Sport gets off the drawing board, a lot of recruits are going to look elsewhere. How many I-AA schools that you have visited have anything that resembles Harbin Field? Or the locker rooms at McDonough?
Facilities do make a difference--if they didn't, why is every other program investing so much in them?
|
|
|
Post by OldSchoolHoya on Sept 18, 2004 16:25:48 GMT -5
I'm with BostonHoya. I, too, am a former player and alum. I have an older sibling who went to Gtown, and when they started, it was ranked 12th in the country. Now 25??? Wow. That's a big drop off. Pretty much, right now, I have decreasing reason to mention to people that I went to Gtown and NO reason to say I played for them. Something needs to be done to correct both...and fast! It is becoming embarrassing. If, by the time I'm 50, Gtown's name is tantamount to Marist's or Bumble[bee] College, I'm going to be pretty unhappy about it. I'm sure other potential alum donors will be as well.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Sept 18, 2004 16:29:44 GMT -5
I think Georgetown's ranking drops next year to 28 or 29. The debt issue will keep things heading downward.
|
|
|
Post by BostonHoya on Sept 18, 2004 16:46:38 GMT -5
First, sorry if this posts twice. I was typing so furiously that I hit a button and lost my message the first time I wrote it...
DFW, as much as I respect all of your hard work and your deep knowledge about the Hoyas, you're wrong on this. The examples you sight are false.
Alumni and parents are building the Multi-Sport because the university is asking them for money. By saying "parents and alumni" are building it, you make it sound like people are passing the hat in the stands. The university has made a major-league and concerted fundraising drive. Sure, it's parents and alums paying, but it's parents and alums that pay for everything else being built...and it's the university that solicits the funds...how about a fundraising drive to bail out the school after the hospital farce and keep us in the top 25 that matters (the academic top 25, that is).
You say Vandy, Baylor (I didn't know that was a good school...) and NWestern are bad despite a good academic rep. That's 1-A football where the hypocrisy is full blown. I dare say academia is not so important to the players recruited by those schools. Our very own basketball program has proven that good academics has not correlated in recent years to sports success. For a better comparison, look at the Ivy League standings (a better comparison to GU football in terms of competition) and you'll see a strong correlation between strong academic reputation and the standings.
Facilities are nice, but do not automatically bring success. If a big stadium and nice facilities mattered so much, wouldn't Holy Cross be great? They have a fantastic stadium and field house, as well as good student support. Where's their recent success?
Location is important at this level, especially when you have a city like DC to offer. You're telling me with a straight face that any kid that knows he's not going to the NFL would rather be in Bethlehem or Worcester for four years, rather than interning for a congressman in the off-season?
|
|
GUHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,083
|
Post by GUHoya07 on Sept 18, 2004 17:05:54 GMT -5
I agree that we should be doing everything we can to get the school out of debt and improve our ranking, but I don't agree with your claim that people who donate money for athletic facilities are the same people who would donate money to academic related fundraisers.
While there are some individuals who will donate to both and trying to raise money from them for athletics may take away a little from academic fundraisers, there are also large groups of individuals who will only donate to either athletics or academics.
The MSF must be built in the next few years if we ever hope to have a truly top level D 1 AA football team.
Of course the team should be doing better than it is right now and there must be some rather serious problems that need to be corrected, but the only way we can ever expect to be a consistent D 1 AA power is with the MSF.
That being said, we also need an on campus basketball arena to be completed sometime in the next 20 years.
|
|
|
Post by BostonHoya on Sept 18, 2004 17:41:23 GMT -5
I didn't claim "that people who donate money for athletic facilities are the same people who would donate money to academic related fundraisers." I don't think I even implied it, but if I did, I didn't mean to. Having said that, I'm not sure how that's relevant - different groups of alums/parents have different special interests within the university, I think everyone agrees on that. I made my statement in response to DFW's statement that it's parents and alums building the MSF. Well, my point is that it's parents and alums that build EVERYTHING, so why make a special point about the MSF?
If the school wants to help itself, it should re-double the efforts to get $$$ to bail it out financially (a little less paletteable in a fundraising circular than building a pretty new stadium, but also a little more serious of an issue too) and worry less about a new stadium - especially for a team that's not anywhere near ready for it.
As an aside, isn't this MSF still going to leave us with the smallest stadium in the league? When it's done, are people going to be saying that no one wants to play in a place that only seats 4000? If "facilities" matter, do we need to factor seating into the equation along with nice locker rooms and a press box?
|
|
|
Post by BostonHoya on Sept 18, 2004 18:12:42 GMT -5
One final note from me...if facilities matter so much, what has Duquesne done to make their facility 38 points better than Georgetown? I mean, Rooney Field is OK, but is it so much better a facility that it leads to a program that defeats a better academic school with a national reputation in a better league in a better city?
|
|
GUHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,083
|
Post by GUHoya07 on Sept 18, 2004 18:19:52 GMT -5
I definitely dont think that Duquesne should be beating us, especially by such a large margin.
I also didn't say that we need better facilities to be decent and win a good amount of games. I just think that we need better facilities if we ever plan on being a top level D-1AA team.
I'm not making any excuses for today's game.
|
|
|
Post by TrueHoyaBlue on Sept 18, 2004 18:29:07 GMT -5
I'm with BostonHoya. I, too, am a former player and alum. I have an older sibling who went to Gtown, and when they started, it was ranked 12th in the country. Now 25??? Wow. That's a big drop off. Not to argue over numbers, but i will. GU has never been ranked higher than 17th, and never lower than 25th, in the fifteen or so years since US News has been doing rankings. A move of one or two spots in a year doesn't really reflect much of anything. If g'town fell out of the top 25, that would be a big deal, but saying that GU was ranked 12th is an inflated sense of history.
|
|
|
Post by Lurking Dog on Sept 18, 2004 19:12:13 GMT -5
... a program that defeats a better academic school with a national reputation in a better league in a better city? And I thought it was all about blocking, tackling, running, catching, etc. What was I thinking???
|
|