Ro
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 228
|
Post by Ro on May 16, 2011 10:35:07 GMT -5
After years upon years of massive student and alumni outcry to cut bait on the football program and better use the resources allocated to anything else on campus has anyone taken notice of the performance of the lacrosse team over the past 4 years?
They haven't made the playoffs in any of the past 4 seasons. There are currently only 61 division I lacrosse teams...16 make the playoffs. That is 26% of the field. So with roughly a 1:4 chance to make it to the post season, our squad hasn't in the past 4 years. From what I can tell, we are touted yearly as a national power in the sport, yet for 4 straight season's we have failed to make the playoffs? That sounds like a complete and total failure to me. That is worse than our hoops team not making it out of the first round. Have there been any articles written in the Voice or Hoya about this, calling for an end to the program? I don't know the economics behind everything, but something in my gut tells me that the cost of a 50 person roster for a non-revenue generating scholarship program with pretty big equipment and travel needs would be reasonably comparable to that of the football budget if not larger. It wouldn't surprise me, based upon his career and length of time on the Hilltop, if Coach Urick himself outearns the enitre football coaching staff.
I'm of course not caling for any teams to be cut or eliminated, but merely venting a bit. Since the return of the program in the mid-90's there have been consistent calls to eliminate the program, even when we were winning games. Then the program falls on some hard times and that chatter picks up...yet there is no chatter about a higher-profile program which likely costs a similar amount of money which is performing at a much worse level, relatively speaking? Why is it that the football program takes the most heat?
And I'm off my soapbox. Good-day to all.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on May 16, 2011 10:55:37 GMT -5
Lacrosse is a fast-growing sport. Small private schools continue to be able to compete as bigger and more powerful schools continue to add teams. It is reasonable to assume that Georgetown has the potential to compete at the sport's highest level for the foreseeable future - and "compete" includes the ability to compete for the sole national championship offered in Divison I. This year included a variety of losses to highly successful schools, including quarterfinal participants, and ended in a mediocre record. After two years of this, lots of Hoyas want to fire the coach to get back in the playoffs.
Georgetown football, by contrast, plays in the sport's second division, for a championship that was won last year, not by Syracuse or Virginia or Maryland, but by Eastern Washington. Their last winning season was in 1999. Their current schedule continues to emphasize the sport's lemmings to give the team the best potential chance for success, and yet they are one year away from a winless season. The team never draws, despite football having few activities competing for its attention (half of the lacrosse team's schedule conflicts with men's basketball.
DFW has smacked me enough that I don't favor cutting the team, but it's annoying to lash out at another sport that hasn't done anything to hurt football. Football needs to get its own house in order rather than complain about how other programs with better records and better prospects don't get treated with the same kid gloves.
|
|
Ro
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 228
|
Post by Ro on May 16, 2011 15:24:19 GMT -5
Obviously the football team hasn't had much of anything to celebrate since 1999, but in the years before that we had a very successful program (albeit at a lower divisional level) and even then the masses complained about the program and called for it to be cut.
I am by no means calling for anything to happen to the lax program. In fact, I much prefer having strong teams in all sports in which we compete. I love it when our lax team does well. They were awesome when I was on campus and it was great. Again, what I asked is why is it that football is consistently defending itself (even when we performed very well) and there doesn't seem to be any type of outcry after 4 years of not making the lacrosse playoffs which used to be a given? And yes, the football team will never square off against USC or Michigan but when I see schools named Siena, Delaware, Hofstra, Villanova, Denver, Penn, Bucknell and Hartford competing for a lacrosse national championship while our season ends early for a 4th consecutive year I again wonder why nothing is really being said. My post is more rhetorical than anything else. I am more trying to understand why it seems as if there is so much hatred directed at football in both times of success and struggle, while it feels like there is not really much negative chatter out there when other programs struggle.
|
|
H2Oya 05
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Let's go Hoyas!
Posts: 298
|
Post by H2Oya 05 on May 16, 2011 15:35:20 GMT -5
The key difference is that the lacrosse team is drifting towards mediocrity, whereas the football team would be maimed and injured by a mediocre team.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on May 16, 2011 15:59:27 GMT -5
Obviously the football team hasn't had much of anything to celebrate since 1999, but in the years before that we had a very successful program (albeit at a lower divisional level) and even then the masses complained about the program and called for it to be cut. I am by no means calling for anything to happen to the lax program. In fact, I much prefer having strong teams in all sports in which we compete. I love it when our lax team does well. They were awesome when I was on campus and it was great. Again, what I asked is why is it that football is consistently defending itself (even when we performed very well) and there doesn't seem to be any type of outcry after 4 years of not making the lacrosse playoffs which used to be a given? And yes, the football team will never square off against USC or Michigan but when I see schools named Siena, Delaware, Hofstra, Villanova, Denver, Penn, Bucknell and Hartford competing for a lacrosse national championship while our season ends early for a 4th consecutive year I again wonder why nothing is really being said. My post is more rhetorical than anything else. I am more trying to understand why it seems as if there is so much hatred directed at football in both times of success and struggle, while it feels like there is not really much negative chatter out there when other programs struggle. Denver hurts your argument. A dinky school in the middle of nowhere hired Bill Tierney, probably the best lacrosse coach in at least the past twenty years, and are now in the quarterfinals. If Denver can do it, Georgetown can, too. Actually, the rest of the schools hurt your argument, too. The two teams that played in the NCAA final were Eastern Washington and Delaware - mid-size state schools. Almost all of the I-AA powers - JMU, Georgia Southern, New Hampshire, Appalachian State - follow this mold. NCAA football rarely has the Patriot League champ make a run. If Villanova and Penn can make the NCAA field, Georgetown can, too. The men's lacrosse program, over the past decade, has a history of taking on - and beating - some of the best programs in the country. They are mediocre now, but still have hope for the future. Back to football. 1. Georgetown has shown no level of success at the Patriot League, a nonscholarship conference composed of schools with a similar academic outlook - in general, however, Georgetown takes sports more seriously than any of them and has one of the best, if not the best, academic profile. 2. The Hoyas have never been competitive at the Patriot League. Since they've entered, they have never challenged for a league championship. And this despite the advantages outlined above. They're just bad. 3. The options for levels of competition below the Patriot League are slim. All of the other conferences constantly lose members who drop football. Being in a league with Butler and San Diego also doesn't help the travel budget. So, quick version justifying cutting it - the Hoyas aren't good, they haven't been good, there aren't any signs that they will be good, and moving down to a lower level isn't a viable option. Calling any time Georgetown has been in the Patriot League - and the sincere calls to cut the program have only come that recently - "success" is disingenuous. And I say this as someone who has made at least one game a year for three straight years. Note that people have suggested cutting baseball, which doesn't have its own field. Football is not the only sport that deals with this threat from people on this board. Please refrain from attacking any sport without providing some justification. As I said before, football needs to work on its own problems rather than attacking other sports.
|
|
|
Post by Problem of Dog on May 16, 2011 20:12:02 GMT -5
The biggest problem with the football program, which also applies to baseball, is that the team has been so consistently atrocious mainly due to leadership issues. Yet the AD seems to show no interest in making changes in either sports' coaching staff, which suggests that the school just doesn't care enough to make an improvement. And if we're not going to actively try and improve while the sports are performing at embarrassing levels, then why fund the teams at all?
|
|
|
Post by Lurking Dog on May 16, 2011 21:39:24 GMT -5
Denver ... A dinky school in the middle of nowhere You need to get out more.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on May 17, 2011 7:36:24 GMT -5
Denver ... A dinky school in the middle of nowhere You need to get out more. I was on a roll. And if that doesn't fly, "Dinky" and "middle of nowhere" are both related to lacrosse.
|
|
Ro
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 228
|
Post by Ro on May 17, 2011 15:34:53 GMT -5
exorcist...what is my arguement? I have no arguement. I asked a question about the relative treatment of different programs by students and our alumni base. My question is more rooted in what appears to be the general policy of lack of support by the university (ex-basketball) as another program that was once somewhat successful fades towards mediocrity.
I did not say that any program should be cut. I did not make an arguementative statement. I am not trying to start a massive debate. I did not attack anyone. I simply asked why does it seem like football takes the most heat?
It seems like you are looking for some type of a debate or fight that just isn't here. If you are looking to blow off some steam join a gym. Boxing is a great way to unwind.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on May 18, 2011 12:02:44 GMT -5
If you propose cutting a sport, that's an argument.
Once again, as cold as I can be (as made by H2 OYA). Football aspires to mediocrity. Lacrosse does not and has not.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,861
|
Post by DFW HOYA on May 18, 2011 12:27:30 GMT -5
Once again, as cold as I can be (as made by H2 OYA). Football aspires to mediocrity. Lacrosse does not and has not. That reads as a very uneducated statement. Exactly who in the football program aspires to this? What recruit aspires to this? If you judge aspirations by results, what would you say to a program that went 18 straight years under .500--did they aspire to medocrity? They did not. (BTW, that was the men's lacrosse program, 1970-88.) Twenty-eight teams at Georgetown can recruit based on who Georgetown thinks is most capable and qualified academically. One sport--and only one-- must recruit only on whom its conference office thinks they should, an arcane cutoff of GPA and SAT scores that declares that one kid is recruitable and one is not, regardless of the situation. Because of this, 90% of the football recruiting base is outright ineligible for recruiting by Georgetown University, not because Admissions says so, but because the Patriot League deems it so; yet, for many years, the same kids off limtis to Georgetown were recruitable by other PL schools. Many of those same kids can be recruited, accepted, and start at places like Army, Duke, or Richmond, but Georgetown still can't touch them. How would men's lacrosse fare under such rules? How would men's basketball? Maybe a better question is whether Georgetown is providing the tools and resources for these teams and their aspirations, and if not, why alumni and donors have not been rallied to assist.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on May 18, 2011 12:36:05 GMT -5
DFW:
Georgetown lacrosse aspired to mediocrity until they hired Dave Urick, who made Hobart a Division III juggernaut and was an impact hire. Football has yet to take any decisions that indicate same (the last one, hiring a football coach from a successful Navy program, seems now to have been a mistake). Football, as you mentioned, does not fund the program to the level of other Patriot ones.
I believe that, with the current resources, many fans would be happy with a .500 level program that, every so often, makes a run for a conference championship. That appears to be a fair definition of aspiring to mediocrity. It's not how things always have to be, but that's the way they look now.
Your last question on priorities remains key.
|
|
|
Post by Problem of Dog on May 18, 2011 12:49:21 GMT -5
You can use the facilities argument to explain football's inherent ceiling, or the academic index limits, but there are things that can be controlled, such as the coaching staff, that the administration seems to show no interest in improving. That's why it seems like football is aspiring to mediocrity. Baseball is in the same boat, as I mentioned before.
|
|
|
Post by hoyahopeful on May 18, 2011 13:11:34 GMT -5
but there are things that can be controlled, such as the coaching staff, that the administration seems to show no interest in improving. That's why it seems like football is aspiring to mediocrity. Therein lies the issue. In response to DFW's question, I doubt anyone thinks that a single player, coach, trainer, etc. aspires to anything less than winning. But after watching the administration for many years appear to ignore obvious deficiencies, it makes one wonder what the true agenda might actually be. Maybe this is what they want--a mediocre team that doesn't cause trouble, places a whole lot of kids on the League Honor Roll, and has a good graduation rate. Of course nobody would ever admit that, so it would all be speculation/conspiracy theory stuff. But when there are blatant problems that are fixable and they don't get addressed, it does make me scratch my head.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on May 18, 2011 15:47:03 GMT -5
It's not aspiring to less than winning - plenty of teams see less than perfection as their goal. Take Duke football - they're not honestly expecting to win the national championship next year, and probably believe that a winning record is something to get really excited about. When you're as bad as Duke has historically been, their fans get eager for lesser results than would Alabama, for example.
Aiming for a mildly successful season (usually around .500, challenges for the championship every now and again, no discipline or academic problems) is not a bad thing and, at the point the team is now, is actually a good goal. Once the Hoyas reach that level - and they can reach that level - it's reasonable for fans to begin to aim a little higher.
|
|
Ro
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 228
|
Post by Ro on May 19, 2011 8:32:40 GMT -5
DFW...thank you for the "uneducated" comment. I was thinking the exact same thing, however it is nice to see the same type of thinking coming from someone else.
And again exorcist, I ask you when did I ever call for a program to be cut? Rather than jumping to an incorrect conclussion, please take a moment to read the first sentence in the third paragraph of my original post.
|
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,866
|
Post by thebin on May 23, 2011 11:01:12 GMT -5
Lacrosse is a fast-growing sport. Small private schools continue to be able to compete as bigger and more powerful schools continue to add teams. It is reasonable to assume that Georgetown has the potential to compete at the sport's highest level for the foreseeable future - and "compete" includes the ability to compete for the sole national championship offered in Divison I. This year included a variety of losses to highly successful schools, including quarterfinal participants, and ended in a mediocre record. After two years of this, lots of Hoyas want to fire the coach to get back in the playoffs. Georgetown football, by contrast, plays in the sport's second division, for a championship that was won last year, not by Syracuse or Virginia or Maryland, but by Eastern Washington. Their last winning season was in 1999. Their current schedule continues to emphasize the sport's lemmings to give the team the best potential chance for success, and yet they are one year away from a winless season. The team never draws, despite football having few activities competing for its attention (half of the lacrosse team's schedule conflicts with men's basketball. DFW has smacked me enough that I don't favor cutting the team, but it's annoying to lash out at another sport that hasn't done anything to hurt football. Football needs to get its own house in order rather than complain about how other programs with better records and better prospects don't get treated with the same kid gloves. Lacrosse could grow at current rates for a hundred years and still not be remotely as important in the culture of college (or high school) athletics as football is and always will be. Football is not like any other sport, it is indispensible in my opinion. I'm not without respect for lacrosse, a sport I grew up liking. But try as I might, I find it almost unwatchable on tv, whereas I have no problem watching IAA football on YES or fox sports regional. The capacity for Gtown football to grow exponentially with the right support and even modest results is very real. I'm not talking about competing for the IAA national title but playing and regularly winning games in a real college stadium against real schools. Gtown lacrosse on the other hand was on the cusp of being a national power for several years and still it couldn't attract much support- not enough to make even the effort to build a stadium that the anemic football program has made. Gtown lax had seemingly made it already- and got what for its success before plumetting down out of the ludicrous top 25 in a sport with 60 programs? Nothing. Give football the chance that Gtown lax got with schollies and a hot coach hire and see if they can't get something in return for a few good years. A real damn stadium for one...that it could share with the lax team that might have been expected to push for a permanent home itself when it was in the national final four.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on May 23, 2011 12:02:48 GMT -5
First off - football is not indispensable. Some of Georgetown's peer competitor schools, including Chicago and Swarthmore, lack football. "The capacity for Gtown football to grow exponentially with the right support and even modest results is very real. I'm not talking about competing for the IAA national title but playing and regularly winning games in a real college stadium against real schools." At a certain point of time, it becomes "show me". Other threads on this board talk about bribing high school marching bands to get people to attend football games. Georgetown has, over ten years, shown a total inability to compete in the Patriot League and the attendance reflects that. I see nothing in the current team, or in the plans on the horizon, that will suddenly allow the magic beans to grow. Despite the football team having some ability to raise funds, Georgetown still couldn't finish funding the MSF, leading to a college field that does not compare favorably with regional high school powers. Lacrosse didn't draw as many people as football. But that's pretty much the problem. When Georgetown footbal is saying "Hey! We outdraw lacrosse!", that's kind of pathetic. At only one school - Hopkins - does lacrosse outdraw football. I'm aware of no other school at the Division I level where the attendance levels are even close and are often separated by thousands, if not tens of thousands. This isn't about lacrosse. Baseball has similarly been hammered and lost its home field a few years ago (and has a poor record and is a sport that's been cut often recently), and every so often people talk about cutting it. Football is no different. This thread keeps on going on. My thought since the beginning has been the "crabs in the bucket" problem - rather than talking about any way to improve the football team, a few fans here become annoyed that lacrosse is getting money and hasn't provided any results for three years, and want to pull them down before they're too succesful. This strategy isn't going to help football. Only improving football is going to help football. UChicago has been playing football since 1969. Link below.--Adminathletics.uchicago.edu/football/fb.htm
|
|
|
Post by ahoyadad on May 23, 2011 12:37:56 GMT -5
"When Georgetown football is saying "Hey! We outdraw lacrosse!", that's kind of pathetic." taken from "theexorcist"
"Georgetown Football" is NOT saying and has NOT said this!!!
It would such a welcome change to see something positive on this board....
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on May 23, 2011 12:46:16 GMT -5
"When Georgetown football is saying "Hey! We outdraw lacrosse!", that's kind of pathetic." taken from "theexorcist""Georgetown Football" is NOT saying and has NOT said this!!! It would such a welcome change to see something positive on this board.... My issue is not with GU football and instead with thebin, who wrote "Gtown lacrosse on the other hand was on the cusp of being a national power for several years and still it couldn't attract much support- not enough to make even the effort to build a stadium that the anemic football program has made. " I apologize for the error on UChicago - I was actually standing on their bleachers less than a year ago.
|
|