|
Post by reformation on Dec 17, 2009 11:53:03 GMT -5
Saw that Georgetown got Joanna Stevens of Blacksburg VA, a top 25 XC runner. She should add depth to the XC team as a freshman(top5-7). She has a twin sister, a top10-15 xc runner who is also choosing between Gtwn and UVA.
Unfortunately Gtwn lost out to Washingto for the nations top distance runner Megan goethals--she probably would have made Gtwn a top 5 xc team next year.
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Nov 28, 2009 11:25:43 GMT -5
I would suspect that Henner has to start questioning what he's doing with the Men's XC team. This is like the 4th yr in a row that the men as a team, despite a couple of individual great perf's, have blown up at the NCAA meet. Next year we'll have a highly recruited group of redshirt freshman + Dennin, i.e., no real Bumby type performer,--looks like we'll be a couple of years away from a top 5-10 contending team again.
The women's team's shortfall is more understanable due to injuries preventing them from fielding a top team, despite Emily Infeld's superstar perf. If they get another top recruit they shld be much improved next yr.
Given how much Infeld improved in XC it will be interesting to see if she can possibly compete for an NCAA 1500 title(at least top 5) on the track. she probably has the best range of any women's NCAA runner now that Jenny Barringer has finished NCAA ellig with her 2:06 800--NCAA XC 8th place finsih and an NCAA 1500 finals appearance as a frosh. I suspect that the women probably would also have an outside shot at an NCAA DMR top 3 or even winning perf indoors if Renee Tomlin is healthy again.
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Nov 28, 2009 9:50:01 GMT -5
A couple of thoughts--because we have more limited resources than the schools that we compete for undergrad students with is all the more reason to be strategic about how we choose to fund and compete in various sports. St John's and Vill probably have more comparable athletic resources to us overall, but really don't compete with us for students--i.e., our peers from a resource point of view are not our competitors and vice versa. I guess the ivies are probably more comparable from a peer/competitor perspective except for mens basketball
We manage to compete successfully for undergrad students with Northwestern, Duke and I guess to a more limited degree Stanford even though we don't actually have comparable academic resources to them because we have a reputation for excellence in undergrad education generally plus a few special areas of excellence, e.g., the SFS + the schools unique location. We really don't compete with these schools across the board on academic basis but are able to compete academically and athletically in a few areas.
I would say that competing with these schools in various sports entails a combo a resources + a reputation for excellence in that sport. Track, e.g., has poor resources but a decent scholarship + coaching funding and a reputation /goal of excellence, i.e., and competes successfully vs Duke, Stan etc. --so obviously we can compete successfully if we pick our spots and aim high(note Villanova just won the women's cross country NCAA title, maybe Gtwn could have won with the extra few women's schollies that it lacks)
--I suspect that the current strategic review of sports that the interim AD is conducting now is looking at which partially funded sports stay in the BE and wchich get moved to the PL--that's not exactly the same as picking the sports that we can compete for an NCAA title in and funding those, since it more or less takes the existing funding situation as a given, but at least its a start towards rational resource allocation--I think the admin is looking to sort out these strategic issues before they hire the new AD(looking to hire the AD to execute, not develop the strategic plan for athletics--maybe I'm wrong, that's just what I heard.)
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Nov 23, 2009 13:53:00 GMT -5
Men we're in 5th place at the half way mark--if true somebody must have dropped out again
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Nov 22, 2009 11:29:11 GMT -5
Reformation: There are lots of sports at Georgetown that are partially funded. Why the dumping on volleyball rather than others? Volleyball almost certainly doesn't have national championship aspirations within the next decade (hello, Washington, Penn State, Stanford, Florida, and Nebraska), but they've won the Big East in the past, and improving the team to compete at a regional and national level seems a legit goal. Men's lacrosse, despite significant funding, has reached a severe hump and has never made the final game and has missed the NCAAs two straight seasons, yet there's no one seriously advocating cutting their funding. Men's soccer has one NCAA tournament win, but there's not a huge push to move those scholarships somewhere else. Volleyball has done about as well as many other women's sports over the years. Not sure why you want to drop their funding, aside from hoyawatcher actually putting something up about their season to give you a target. Exorcist, I'm not trying to dump on volleyball! I'd actually be ok with increasing funding for the sport if a credible case can be made that increased funding would make the program nationally competitive. If we do not have the potential to be nationally competitive even with increased funding, I think that we have to examine whether the resources allocated to the sport make sense--I would do this periodically for all sports, not just volleyball. Accepting your point, I'd also probably put sports like baseball ahead of volleyball as targets for restructuring. As you correctly point out, Gtwn has a bunch of partially funded sports. Most of these programs are mediocre. However, to be fair volleyball is not on the same competitive footing as soccer or lax, though I agree with you that the results in those sports are disappointing as of late. Also, I'm pretty sure that Lax's goal is to compete at the highest level of the sport, NCAA tourney, final four natl champ etc--soccer is further behind but I guess that their goals are similar--given that their goals make sense, the issue is execution, not the objective. Also, the women's sports that get similar #'s of schollies to volleyball are lax, track, and soccer(last few yrs). Track and lax are elite national programs--admittedly those sports are a bit better funded than volleyball, but I think that's important--I'm fine with paying more for an upgrade, but having a 3/4 funded top 100 program seems questionable. I just think the Univ should rethink(be a bit more strategic!) how money is allocated within the athletic dept to get the best bang for the buck looking at all factors including actual team performance, potential team performance, alumni support, academic cost-i.e., how many and how big an admissions reach do we have to make for the recruited athletes, financial cost, general student interest etc.. The other top academic private universities that also compete at D1 athletics, i.e., Stanford, Duke, and Nothwestern all do this pretty well and have gradually upgraded selected sports over the years, but are not afraid to make choices. Nwestern for example has built the top women's lax program ,but does not really compete in track and field. Being mediocre at everything is not a good strategy. I'd be happy to make cuts elsewhere and give more funding to volloyball if there would be a big impact. I suspect that the interim AD is making a general review of sports prior to hiring a new AD--it will be interesting to see if they make any changes, either upgrading or downgrading the status of some of the partially funded sports.
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Nov 22, 2009 10:01:34 GMT -5
Also, I spoke to competing in the middle of the BE because that is a reasonable goal for next year from the history we have had over the last several years. To say much more than that to start with is happy talk until you get to that level. Personally I think the team has a higher ceiling even next year but realism says the first goal is making the BE tourney next year. I think the 2 recruits are instructive for anyone who looked to see who they are. One was in the mix for the Gatorade player of the year in the state of Washington. That is a huge VB state. The other was the primary middle on the team that won the 2A championship in the state of California. Both play at the highest levels of club VB. These kids are at the same level as any team in the BE short of ND. Our issue is that we get 2 of these kids per year instead of the 3 or 4 that other teams get. Coach Williams was an all american middle at Wisconsin as a player. As a coach she was the lead assistant at U of Florida - a perenial top 10 VB program. I can assure you her goal is not just the middle of the BE. But I can also tell you that if we were to make the NCAA we would be the only BCS conference school to make it with only 9 ships. The last line of your reply seems to prove my point--If we really need 12 schollies to be fully competitive, why run the program with 9--that's too expensive to be a token title 9 effort and if its too small to be competitive for the BE title + making the ncaa's i'm not sure why we pick some middle ground --If we can be a top 20 program with some modest incremental investment great lets do it! But if we're going to run an almost fully funded program and be top 50-100 I"m not sure that the cost/benefit makes sense. A full schollie in women's track for instance, gets us a top 1-20 athlete in their respective event and someone who can maybe push the team to a top 5 versus top 20 finish in XC lets say--maybe someone who'd have a shot at the olympic trials. In women's rowing I would expect a full schollie would give us a shot at a recruit on the Jr natl team. So I think we have to be conscious of the opportunity costs with different programs. I don't mean to beat on volleyball(I m a fan of the sport--my brother actually played professionally on the AVP beach circuit) The coach seems qualified as you mention, and capable of coaching a higher performing effort and the short term goals that you mention are appropriate. I'm not really concerned about this year's disappointing performance if the program is appropriately targeted over the medium/long run. However; I'm not sure what the real goals of the program are and that the resources allocated to the program are at the right level-either too high or too low.
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Nov 20, 2009 19:52:12 GMT -5
With the end of the season I thought I would give a post mortem on what was a somewhat disappointing VB season. Even with some major injuries I will detail below, I thought we had a good shot at being the last team into the BE tourney but that hope got blown up when the team got swept on a trip to Rutgers and SH - 2 teams they had to beat in order to have any shot. The upside of the season was the victory over Cincinnati when we played about as well as we could. But we didn't play the middle of the BE (Marquette, WV, SH, etc) as well as I had hoped. So while we didn't make as good a run at the BE tourney as I had hoped/expected when you look at this season there is more to be excited about for next year than cause for concern about a downturn in the VB program. The biggest issue for this team was the injuries to multiple players that I thought they could overcome but in the end were too much for a team with only 9 scholarships instead of the normal 12. The team lost its sr outside hitter (best hitter and passer) plus the 2 6'3" kids slated for RS and depth in the middle. On the back row one of the freshman DS's was never healthy and a transfer kid didn't get to play until late in the year due to academic transfer issues. The rotations and roles for much of the team were never really settled and that had a large detrimental effect. Beyond that though there are several really nice pieces in place that should be better next year. The middles are very solid, our setter had a very good first year as the primary setter and the libero set a single season record for digs. Several of these kids are in the top 10 of the BE in particular categories: So Ashley Malone is number 6 in assists So Tory Rezin is number 7 in digs Fr Lindsay Wise is number 9 in blocks. Throw in Jrs Vanessa Dorisman and Kortney Robinson who led the team in kills and that is a solid core of young improving players. None of the team leaders in blocks/digs/kills is leaving. A key player next year will be Analee Abell - one of the injured 6'3" RS players. She blew out a knee and has been rehabbing. If she can fill the huge hole we have at RS and let the other outside hitters find a working rotation that will be huge. I understand we have also signed a couple of long athletic front line players who have an opportunity to come in and compete for playing time. I don't think we are ready to compete with ND quite yet but barring another injury plague we should be in position to compete for the middle of the BE next year. Whether we have 9 or 12 full schollies, that is a lot of resources for a program that is not competitive--if another 3 schollies would make us competitive at the NCAA level, I'd be all for it. But if were looking at a middle of the road BE finish as the programs goal I think we should allocate the money to other sports, e.g., fully fund womens track, rowing etc.. Those sports, + others e.g., could attract national level athletes. If we have a plan to be competitive at he national level that takes time that's ok but having 9 full schollies for a mediocre effort is a bad use of university resources.
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Nov 15, 2009 20:26:08 GMT -5
Women's team officially qualified as an at large participant.
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Nov 14, 2009 19:36:49 GMT -5
Men seem to have exceeded expectations--If Levi Miller makes another jump in performance like he did this week and Banks comes back they could do well at the NCAA's.
Considering they did not have McCafferty the women did very well--hopefully she will be back at full strength for the ncaa's. If she is not at full strength the women will be hard pressed to replicate last yrs performance. Emily Jones seems like she struggled a bit today, but Infeld put in a big time performance and should have a shot at a top 20 NCAA perf, certainly an all american perf in any case. She has gradually become an elite XC runner in addition to being an elite middle distance specialist. It will be interesting to see if her performances in XC and I guess improved endurance help her on the track in the 1500..
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Oct 31, 2009 13:38:44 GMT -5
Also women might have gotten high as second if Jilian King had not transferred to BC. That turned out to be a big loss for the team. Agree with Nevada that the men would have won if they ran the top frosh, but that would not be worth it given the distribution of top runners on the team---other than rs freshman Dennin they are all sr's or grad students. The inbetween years have a limited number of XC guys.
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Oct 31, 2009 13:11:07 GMT -5
Also a bit of a disappointment by the women, though a great run by Emily Infeld--I would have thought emily jones + McCafferty would do better--but McCafferty is probably just getting back to form and emily jones is getting her first taste of championship running--the women are also hurt by ythe injuries to Tomlin + others--they have a core of three very good young runners--hopefully they can develop one more elite runner and add another recruit for next yr
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Oct 31, 2009 12:10:30 GMT -5
Seems like levi Miller is way behind last yr and that is killing us--I wonder if he is not healed from his injuries--also Taye and roberts have pretty much fallen off the map
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Oct 31, 2009 12:07:14 GMT -5
Men 2nd beaten by Syracuse, Bumby also beaten--3rd. A pretty disappointing performance, but not surprising given the season to date where only Bumby and denin have performed well. Maybe they are training through the race getting ready for the NCAA. Hopefully it will be a reversal of last yr where they had good seasons until the ncaa and underperformed there, maybe this year they will outperform at the NCAA.
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Oct 17, 2009 12:43:38 GMT -5
You called it Nevada--the women finished 4th and beat stanford. They should improve a bit as i'd bet McCafferty still has a lot of upside vs her performance at pre nats.
Too bad the hoyas lost freshman caroline King as a transfer to BC--she is BC's top runner and would have been top 2-4 at Gtwn--the team would have had a shot at top 5 at the NCAA with her-i didn't think she was that good but has been tearing it up for BC where her sister runs.
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Oct 4, 2009 20:11:39 GMT -5
Really needed that win. Getting a win at Uconn puts us on the right side of the bubble. What do the women need to do now to get in the tourney--
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Oct 3, 2009 17:54:59 GMT -5
Hoyas win the women' s meet with McCafferty running. Team seems to be improving steadily--hopefully their ranking does not fall too much.
Mark Dennin continues to impress for the men, hopefully Levi Miller is ok. They will need another all american perf by him to go along with Bumby, Krisch, Dennin etc. Roberts and Taye hopefully were taking it easy in their first race.
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Sept 27, 2009 21:35:45 GMT -5
I know. You would think someone removed Shakespeare from the English major requirements. I think all of the schools should base their reputations on a weird freshmen survey class requirement. Everyone in the MSB study hard for the "Companies of the DJIA" test! Hopefully some good will come out of what you somewhat correctly point out is a is a big uproar over something that is maybe not so important in the big picture. I do agree with the poster's though who argue that the current format is worth keeping; if the new course really is that valuable there is no reason you culdn't have the students take both. Pirtle started teaching the course in my soph year I think, so I just missed having to take the class, though we had to take a probably watered down exam primarily by studying on our own--I vaguely remember some old geography prof giving a couple of lectures. As mentioned above the uproar over the map will focus attention on the SFS core curriculum which needs a major overhaul. Its really pretty much the same as when I was a student in the mid 80's and in fact when my father in law was a student in the late 40"s. Obviously a lot of things have changed in both the academic and real world over that timespan and the sfs core curriculum has not kept pace.
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Sept 27, 2009 21:15:15 GMT -5
Women tie Seton Hall on the road 1-1. I wonder if the women are being hurt in conf play by their weak out of conf schedule-or are they in a temporary rut.
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Sept 27, 2009 21:13:07 GMT -5
Scholarships are a very murky subject--outside of basketball and track, every other sport is below the NCAA maximum and some are at or below Big East standards, plus there is gray area in the definition of a scholarship (a full grant vs. a partial award vs. a need-based offer). By contrast, Notre Dame is seeking to endow every position on every athletic team with full scholarships. Without going into numbers you can look at a team's record and get a fair idea of how they are funded. If football or field hockey were better funded, you wouldn't see those kind of records going forward. (Football has another issue in play if readers are familiar with what Fordham is up to.) georgetownfootball.blogspot.com/2009/06/ninth-ivy.htmlThe reason I asked the actual # by sport is to see which sports in fact under/overperform resources allocated them, rather than just guessing.
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Sept 21, 2009 19:10:26 GMT -5
Does anyone know how many scholarships we allocate to each sport and where that # stands in relation to the NCAA max for that sport?
|
|