DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,888
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Oct 18, 2019 12:06:27 GMT -5
Here's my concern long-term. It's to some degree a historical accident that Georgetown has a strong basketball tradition. Ignoring the pre-John Thompson era (sorry DFW), the main reason why Georgetown is where it is now is because of John Thompson Jr. and his success. And to some degree, that was luck. What would have happened if fate led John Thompson to coaching somewhere else (or not at all)? Excellent question. Had Morgan Wooten been named head coach in 1972, or if Thompson had taken the Oklahoma offer in 1980, Georgetown basketball would be a different place. It wouldn't be the Jack Magee era all over again, but it would be different, probably along the lines of Boston College with Tom Davis and later Gary Williams: always good but never great. (Yes, there is an alternate universe where the then-AU coach would have been a candidate for the Georgetown job had Thompson left.) For this reason, it's crucial for the program to have measurable success in the next 5-10 years. Once DeGioia is out of the picture, and Thompson's influence wanes, will there be the same institutional support for basketball? That's hard to predict because we do not know who will have power. That said, it's a lot easier for a university to give up on a failing program than a successful one that subsidies the many other sports Georgetown supports. So while I think everything will be fine for near-intermediate future, I think it's crucial for our program to have success in the next decade, otherwise, the long-term future could be troublesome. I think people underestimate DeGioia's impact in the last decade. Were it not for his insistence on the seven schools holding together, it was likely that the schools would have drifted into other conferences, with some staying in what is now the AAC, a couple going to the Missouri Valley, maybe one or two to the A-10. (I've never quite figured out where Georgetown would have gone.) On a go-forward basis, the Big East commitment by DeGioia, not the memories of the 1980's, will be the anchor of institutional support, because Georgetown is tied in with that deal and wouldn't pay to leave. I would disagree with you that we have 5 or 10 years, however. If through no fault of his own (injuries, transfers, etc.) Ewing runs into a couple more years of 6th/7th place finishes and near-misses in March, he's going to catch heat. No one imagined Chris Mullin would get the treatment he did from St. John's, either. The time to win, and win big, is the next one to three years. (To be clear, "win big" does not mean a first round exit as an 11 seed.) The fan base of the 2000's and 2010's has been burned out by a decade of mistakes and overreaches and when the alumni of the 1960's and 1970's pass the torch, the support won't be there if Georgetown isn't good and soon. Older alumni take the long view because they've been there for good times and bad, but if you're under 35, you literally have no memory of the really good times, save for a two year period from Duke 2006 to the Stephen Curry game in 2008. Where will the annual support come from in the 2020's? |
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Oct 18, 2019 13:19:17 GMT -5
But another instance of creating a victim, so typical of our left of center posters. It takes a certain level of chutzpah to assert this as a quality of one side only when the victim-in-chief is in residence in the WH. I think it takes a certain amount of chutzpah to let your hatred of President Trump color so many of the posts you make. |
|
One
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 192
|
Post by One on Oct 18, 2019 13:49:57 GMT -5
It takes a certain level of chutzpah to assert this as a quality of one side only when the victim-in-chief is in residence in the WH. I think it takes a certain amount of chutzpah to let your hatred of President Trump color so many of the posts you make. Move it to another board. |
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Oct 18, 2019 14:57:03 GMT -5
I can't think of one HM basketball school that downgraded its program due to lack of institutional support, my guess is it'll never happen at Gtown. Also, it may be more likely the next guy after DeGioa will be an even bigger proponent of the basketball program than he is.. Let's be honest here the Gtown administration isn't exactly on the cutting edge when it comes to running a basketball program...I generally agree with you, but my fears are grounded in the bold part above. Will Georgetown be in the Big East for the foreseeable future as a high-major basketball school? Of course. My concern is less downgrading to a different conference (no reason to do that), but more like being in the Big East, but mailing it in otherwise, and not truly fielding a competitive team. Right now, Georgetown has a major institutional commitment to the program via the Thompson Center, Thompson himself, and Ewing. That said, this is not guaranteed 10-20 years down the road though (or even as DFW notes, perhaps even sooner). It would not be hard to foresee circumstances where the university is not willing to spend $3 million on a coach, and is perfectly fine accepting the Big East money, and not worrying about winning or success. My concern isn't that we won't be high-major; my concern is that the university will stop treating it as such if we had a long period of failure (like DePaul). I agree that right now this looks very unlikely, but I think sustained success is the only way to ensure that never happens. Perhaps I have less confidence in Georgetown, but it's not hard for me to see Georgetown eventually having leadership that doesn't care about basketball's success, as long as the FS1 money is coming in. DFW makes a lot of good points about DeGioia above. For a university President, he's been there a long time. I have no idea how long he'll be there (could be a while longer), but it's hard to envision someone more supportive of the program. Georgetown could have easily been left out on the outside in realignment, and DeGioia was one of the keys in making sure that did not happen. I guarantee there are many in the Georgetown community who would not have cared at all if that happened. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2019 16:09:31 GMT -5
But, if college sports generate enormous wealth, why should the players be locked out of sharing in that? Why should they have to wait until (if) they are pros to get a pice of the pie? Everyone agrees that the money in these college sports is here to say, why can’t we agree that a different distribution of that money would be better? 300K for four years at GU. They already share. 1) If you believe that to be true then surely you have to think that would be a major selling point for future prospects. 2) The Ivy League schools don't offer scholarships and they still manage to compete at a high level. |
|
seaweed
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,724
|
Post by seaweed on Oct 18, 2019 16:10:14 GMT -5
It takes a certain level of chutzpah to assert this as a quality of one side only when the victim-in-chief is in residence in the WH. I think it takes a certain amount of chutzpah to let your hatred of President Trump color so many of the posts you make. All due respect, very few of us "hate" Donald Trump - we hate seeing our country turned into a dictatorship and wouldn't care if it was DJT or some Dem abusing power like this, profiting off their public service and aiding and abetting other dictators around the world like Putin, Assad, Kim Jung Un etc. If some Dem said they had an "Absolute right" to do anything even once, you can be sure we would be right there in the streets protesting with you. Or dodging subpoenas. Or lying constantly. Those aren't political positions - they are American positions and everybody who embraces someone who does that crap is un-American. But seriously, focus on hoops- the season is just three weeks away man! MODS: You can delete this now - I feel better already. |
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,704 
|
Post by Elvado on Oct 18, 2019 16:16:52 GMT -5
300K for four years at GU. They already share. If you believe that to be true than surely you have to think that would be a major selling point for future prospects... It may not be, but it should. A Georgetown education has value. What attracts players today? Of that I have no idea. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2019 16:18:58 GMT -5
If you believe that to be true than surely you have to think that would be a major selling point for future prospects... It may not be, but it should. A Georgetown education has value. What attracts players today? Of that I have no idea. Well you're basically saying it costs the school 300k for athletes to come here.... Do you believe that honestly? Since we're talking about systemic change do you think the Georgetown experience is what most student athletes are getting on average? |
|
hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,227
|
Post by hoya9797 on Oct 18, 2019 16:22:44 GMT -5
If you believe that to be true than surely you have to think that would be a major selling point for future prospects... It may not be, but it should. A Georgetown education has value. What attracts players today? Of that I have no idea. True and maybe at Georgetown, that’s all they can or would be willing to offer. Which is fine. It will clearly define the type of player and person that will come. But, at other place, the value of the education is worth far less than the value of the player. And, in those places, the player should be able to earn what he’s worth. |
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,704
|
Post by Elvado on Oct 18, 2019 16:28:29 GMT -5
It may not be, but it should. A Georgetown education has value. What attracts players today? Of that I have no idea. Well you're basically saying it costs the school 300k for athletes to come here.... Do you believe that honestly? Since we're talking about systemic change do you think the Georgetown experience is what most student athletes are getting on average? We are not talking about systemic change; you are. Do they get 300K? No Do they get something worth 300K? Yes. Is the experience the same as non-athletes? Likely not. Is it better? Is it worse? Ask the students. It is actually simple. Any athlete who does not like the arrangement can ply his trade elsewhere. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2019 16:32:23 GMT -5
Well you're basically saying it costs the school 300k for athletes to come here.... Do you believe that honestly? Since we're talking about systemic change do you think the Georgetown experience is what most student athletes are getting on average? We are not talking about systemic change; you are. Do they get 300K? No Do they get something worth 300K? Yes. Is the experience the same as non-athletes? Likely not. Is it better? Is it worse? Ask the students. It is actually simple. Any athlete who does not like the arrangement can ply his trade elsewhere. Read the question again. The school isn't coming out of pocket 300k for these athletes to go to Georgetown. That's not the schools cost. So when you say they are sharing to the tune of 300k that's false. If the last sentence is how you feel then stop crying about it. The Ivy league schools still manage to compete without offering scholarships. Georgetown could do the same. |
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,704
|
Post by Elvado on Oct 18, 2019 16:36:20 GMT -5
We are not talking about systemic change; you are. Do they get 300K? No Do they get something worth 300K? Yes. Is the experience the same as non-athletes? Likely not. Is it better? Is it worse? Ask the students. It is actually simple. Any athlete who does not like the arrangement can ply his trade elsewhere. Read the question again. The school isn't coming out of pocket 300k for these athletes to go to Georgetown. That's not the schools cost. So when you say they are sharing to the tune of 300k that's false. If the last sentence is how you feel then stop crying about it. The Ivy league schools still manage to compete without offering scholarships. Georgetown could do the same. I am not crying about it. I don’t think the athletes are owed anything beyond the education offered them in exchange for their skills. If they did not get the scholarship, they would pay (or borrow) 300K to do 4 years at Georgetown just like a non-athlete. Would I care if they got more? Nope. But are they owed anything? Also a hard no. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2019 16:39:09 GMT -5
Read the question again. The school isn't coming out of pocket 300k for these athletes to go to Georgetown. That's not the schools cost. So when you say they are sharing to the tune of 300k that's false. If the last sentence is how you feel then stop crying about it. The Ivy league schools still manage to compete without offering scholarships. Georgetown could do the same. I am not crying about it. I don’t think the athletes are owed anything beyond the education offered them in exchange for their skills. Would I care if they got more? Nope. But are they owed anything? Also a hard no. Sure, but if in this model a school is able to profit off their skills why shouldn't they be allowed to also? Do you concede the 300k number is false at least? It's like me inviting you to eat for free at my restaurant where a meal costs 1,000 a plate then saying, look it cost me 1000 dollars to make that meal for you. Obviously my cost is far less.. |
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,704
|
Post by Elvado on Oct 18, 2019 16:49:19 GMT -5
I am not crying about it. I don’t think the athletes are owed anything beyond the education offered them in exchange for their skills. Would I care if they got more? Nope. But are they owed anything? Also a hard no. Sure, but if in this model a school is able to profit off their skills why shouldn't they be allowed to also? Do you concede the 300k number is false at least? It's like me inviting you to eat at my restaurant where a meal costs 1,000 a plate retail then saying, look It cost me 1000 dollars to make that meal for you. Obviously my cost is far less.. The 300K number is not false if the next kid in would be paying retail. As I have said repeatedly, if the rule is changed to allow payment, be it for likeness, jerseys, etc I am fine with that. But right now, these kids walk into school knowing they don’t get paid. To say they are “owed” anything is fantasy. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2019 16:51:37 GMT -5
Sure, but if in this model a school is able to profit off their skills why shouldn't they be allowed to also? Do you concede the 300k number is false at least? It's like me inviting you to eat at my restaurant where a meal costs 1,000 a plate retail then saying, look It cost me 1000 dollars to make that meal for you. Obviously my cost is far less.. The 300K number is not false if the next kid in would be paying retail. As I have said repeatedly, if the rule is changed to allow payment, be it for likeness, jerseys, etc I am fine with that. But right now, these kids walk into school knowing they don’t get paid. To say they are “owed” anything is fantasy. Vadi... You're saying the school is sharing 300k with the athlete. The schools operational cost isn't 300k per student. Knock it off... There's absolutely no way you think that. |
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,704
|
Post by Elvado on Oct 18, 2019 16:58:05 GMT -5
The 300K number is not false if the next kid in would be paying retail. As I have said repeatedly, if the rule is changed to allow payment, be it for likeness, jerseys, etc I am fine with that. But right now, these kids walk into school knowing they don’t get paid. To say they are “owed” anything is fantasy. Vadi... You're saying the school is sharing 300k with the athlete. The schools operational cost isn't 300k per student. Knock it off... There's absolutely no way you think that. Okay. They are sharing the real cost, whatever that may be. Either way, the players are “owed” nothing more. If they were told they would be paid and then funds were not forthcoming, they would be owed. We don’t fundamentally disagree here. And I would not say word one if the Rules were changed. As to your restaurant analogy, if I fill a seat that generates you $1000, that is the income you lose By Inviting me to dinner. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2019 17:03:08 GMT -5
Vadi... You're saying the school is sharing 300k with the athlete. The schools operational cost isn't 300k per student. Knock it off... There's absolutely no way you think that. Okay. They are sharing the real cost, whatever that may be. Either way, the players are “owed” nothing more. If they were told they would be paid and then funds were not forthcoming, they would be owed. We don’t fundamentally disagree here. And I would not say word one if the Rules were changed. As to your restaurant analogy, if I fill a seat that generates you $1000, that is the income you lose By Inviting me to dinner. But that's not how things are calculated, and I have a hard time believing B-ball players are taking spots from non student athletes. They operate in a different space. |
|
hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,227
|
Post by hoya9797 on Oct 18, 2019 17:05:35 GMT -5
Vadi... You're saying the school is sharing 300k with the athlete. The schools operational cost isn't 300k per student. Knock it off... There's absolutely no way you think that. Okay. They are sharing the real cost, whatever that may be. Either way, the players are “owed” nothing more. If they were told they would be paid and then funds were not forthcoming, they would be owed. We don’t fundamentally disagree here. And I would not say word one if the Rules were changed. As to your restaurant analogy, if I fill a seat that generates you $1000, that is the income you lose By Inviting me to dinner. Correct me if I’m wrong but it seems as if you fairly strenuously object to changing the rules. Why is that? |
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,704
|
Post by Elvado on Oct 18, 2019 17:08:53 GMT -5
Okay. They are sharing the real cost, whatever that may be. Either way, the players are “owed” nothing more. If they were told they would be paid and then funds were not forthcoming, they would be owed. We don’t fundamentally disagree here. And I would not say word one if the Rules were changed. As to your restaurant analogy, if I fill a seat that generates you $1000, that is the income you lose By Inviting me to dinner. Correct me if I’m wrong but it seems as if you fairly strenuously object to changing the rules. Why is that? I don’t at all. I would not say word one if the rules are changed. It is probably the fair and equitable thing to do. But right now, the rules are what the rules are and no one is “owed” anything. |
|
hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,227
|
Post by hoya9797 on Oct 18, 2019 17:11:43 GMT -5
Ok, you are in the “fine if it happens but not going to advocate for it” camp. Fair enough.
|
|
