Archive for Lafayette Sports Fan Forum This forum is not affiliated in any way with Lafayette College, Lafayette College Athletics, The Maroon Club or any other official organization. Please be respectful of other posters as well as the athletes, coaches and administrators.
 


       Lafayette Sports Fan Forum Forum Index -> Men's Lacrosse
Bogus Megapardus

at Metro C.

Pathetic, as usual.  Metro winning every FO and scoring at will.
Bogus Megapardus

Please stop embarrassing the college with this team.

I'm done.
seenalot

There isn't a whole lot to add and not a lot (nothing) positive to say after that one.
pardfan

I wish there had been more public debate on whether or not to admit Boston U into the Patriot League. Letting pinheads like Weiss make that decision...well, it just proves how out of touch he really was.  Feel like we're "holding a wolf by the ears" (T. Jeff.) when we play them in any sport.
pards4ever

the team has totally given up on Rogalski... #45 gave up after he was pulled.. #24 and # 42 should not be on the field...our Dmidds are horrific ...put #9 at dmid...he is big enough to match up with bigger opposing mids and offensively he  is not getting it done...also change the goalie at half...im afraid this coaching staff has to go
pardfan

got to admire Rogalski's spunk     smallest school in a tough conference
he was strictly "up arrow" going in      I'm not panicking....yet
goalie looks weak to this casual fan
pards4ever

Spunk??? We got blown out by a 2nd year program
pardfan

If he is replaced as you said he should be, where's he go then?  Proof that the Lafayette job in men's lacrosse IN THE PATRIOT LEAGUE is career suicide.
The distance between the top team (or two) and the bottom team is a million miles.  That can't be said about any other sport in this League.
I'd say it takes "spunk" to take the job.  Other words come to mind.
Pard4Life

We are Columbia football of Patriot League lacrosse.

I still can't get over how a 2nd year program can be competitive while we can't even win FOs.

This has probably been discussed before but what's our funding?  Scholarships?
pardfan

Boston U can pull it off --even in the context of this tough league--because of their size and athletic savvy IMO.  They're used to winning.
pards4ever

We need more shots!! Did you see BU?? It was a shooting gallery... Enough with this offense let the kids play street ball... You have nothing to lose
pardfan

After seeing last yrs game, I decided to work in the yard.  To be manhandled by a brand new (div 1, that is) program was as insulting as it gets
Lafalum

Pard4Life wrote:
We are Columbia football of Patriot League lacrosse.

I still can't get over how a 2nd year program can be competitive while we can't even win FOs.

This has probably been discussed before but what's our funding?  Scholarships?


Men's Lacrosse raises a lot of money. Giving scholarships has title ix issues. One scholarship needs a counter scholarship in a women's sport. So the question ultimately is do we reduce a men's scholarship (football), eliminate a men's team ( baseball??) that's large enough and expensive enough to have an impact, increase the size of the school generating enough money eventually so we can compete, or expect that some sports will never be good  and concentrate on those sports proven we can be competitive??? Under the present system there will not be scholarships for men's lacrosse.We will always need to concentrate on football and basketball. field hockey has been proven to be a sport we can have national aspirations ( not withstanding the past two years under the present regime), women' lacrosse needs to be rethought, baseball is a tough call given our history and northeast location. We need an indoor field house, lacrosse facilities, more scholarship money, more money for excellent coaches. In the end, are we talking leadership to move us forward.
newpardslax

NCAA rules allow for a total of 12.6 total scholarships per year in men's lacrosse for the entire roster.  Schools in the PL have taken different approaches in how much of that they fund.  I don't know specifics but I believe Lafayette is funding the program incrementally giving Rogalski a bit more each year after he started.  That is why the recruiting classes are getting much stronger as you see announcements of the 2014-2017 commitments.  They are slowly gaining the ability to attract the talent they couldn't previously.  

Per this article BU started with an aggressive plan of 3 scholarships per year since inception so they are probably at 6-9 currently, likely at the higher end of PL programs and is reflected in the talent on the field.

http://www.insidelacrosse.com/art...-a-q-amp-a-with-ad-mike-lynch/342
Lafalum

newpardslax wrote:
NCAA rules allow for a total of 12.6 total scholarships per year in men's lacrosse for the entire roster.  Schools in the PL have taken different approaches in how much of that they fund.  I don't know specifics but I believe Lafayette is funding the program incrementally giving Rogalski a bit more each year after he started.  That is why the recruiting classes are getting much stronger as you see announcements of the 2014-2017 commitments.  They are slowly gaining the ability to attract the talent they couldn't previously.  

Per this article BU started with an aggressive plan of 3 scholarships per year since inception so they are probably at 6-9 currently, likely at the higher end of PL programs and is reflected in the talent on the field.

http://www.insidelacrosse.com/art...-a-q-amp-a-with-ad-mike-lynch/342


Guys you have to consider reality.
1) when Lafayette instituted scholarships and the agreement was we would spend no more on scholarships than we spent on need based aid.( As a result friends of football must raise enough money to add one scholarship to get us to 58 which is critical to get a BCS team to play us for money.)
2) For every men's scholarship this must be an equivalent women's scholarship.
3) Football is taking 57 scholarships now, Boston has no football team neither does American or does Loyola.
4) we are the smallest PL school at the moment with 23 sports.

One or more of the above must change in order for us to fully fund men's lacrosse, or even 1/2 fund it.
pards4ever

Holy Cross has 3 scholarships,they had the same team last year. They went out to get a new coach from Bucknell... Please don't tell me Lafayette can't do the same
Lafalum

pards4ever wrote:
Holy Cross has 3 scholarships,they had the same team last year. They went out to get a new coach from Bucknell... Please don't tell me Lafayette can't do the same


They have under funded football (multiple scholarships less than the max allowed)…. not going to happen at Lafayette.

You have to answer the distribution of scholarships to make room for Men's Lacrosse. So tell me, who gets cut, what women's sport gets the equal number, where does the money come from if we increase the total, and/or when does Lafayette raise its population to make it match a 23 division one program?? Lafayette will not fire this coach.
pards4ever

Then Lafayette will never be competitive
Lafalum

pards4ever wrote:
Then Lafayette will never be competitive


Which is why we need leadership that is willing to be more aggressive.
pardfan

Eventually we will have to consider ROI (return on investment) as it applies to athletics.  The notoriety we are getting from making this March Madness event tells me that we should approach men's basketball like nothing else matters.  It's relatively cheap--but effective.  Football 150 was nice but we have to wait another 50 years to get that kind of publicity.  Georgetown bringing back football.  What could they be thinking?
Bogus Megapardus

Pard4Life wrote:
We are Columbia football of Patriot League lacrosse.


This +1

Lafayette can compete in lacrosse without max scholarships IF it is an attractive place to play.  Hobart does it without ANY scholarships. Limited scholarships must be offered judiciously to critical positions, i.e. FOGO, Goalie, and a top-shelf long pole (or two) for the D.  There are dozens of smaller, fleet-footed attack out there and we'll never have any trouble getting them.  But that makes no difference if we cannot gain, and maintain, possession.

Just being at a PL school - any PL school - ought to be attractive enough for a top D1 MLax coaching candidate.  I'm just so incredibly saddened at what has become Lafayette lacrosse.  More than a hundred years of history, and yet we're getting trounced by a friggin' second-year squad.

Lafayette just won the PL BBall tournament and is going to the Dance.  Lafayette just beat Lehigh in front of 50K fans at Yankee Stadium.  Those are solid accomplishments.  Why can't we manage .500 in lacrosse?  An occasional win over Lehigh/Bucknell/Colgate/Navy and a spot in the PL tourney is not too much to ask.
Lafalum

pardfan wrote:
Eventually we will have to consider ROI (return on investment) as it applies to athletics.  The notoriety we are getting from making this March Madness event tells me that we should approach men's basketball like nothing else matters.  It's relatively cheap--but effective.  Football 150 was nice but we have to wait another 50 years to get that kind of publicity.  Georgetown bringing back football.  What could they be thinking?


I am a supporter of everything Pard, but you make sense!!
Bogus Megapardus

As a former player, I admit to a lacrosse bias, just as a former baseball or soccer player would want to support their sport.  But aside from field hockey, lacrosse is the best chance we have for an NCAA final four spot someday.

Navy has been there.  Loyola won it all.  Success in MLax is at our fingertips but it's slipping away fast.  Congrats, of course, to Colgate or Bucknell or HC or even Lehigh if they make the final four someday soon.  But to sit and watch Metropolitan College win the PL MLax crown?  I'd sooner fall on my sword.
Franks Tanks

Lafalum wrote:
pardfan wrote:
Eventually we will have to consider ROI (return on investment) as it applies to athletics.  The notoriety we are getting from making this March Madness event tells me that we should approach men's basketball like nothing else matters.  It's relatively cheap--but effective.  Football 150 was nice but we have to wait another 50 years to get that kind of publicity.  Georgetown bringing back football.  What could they be thinking?


I am a supporter of everything Pard, but you make sense!!


Agree to an extent, and many schools throw everything at men's basketball.  Pretty much the entire MAAC, A-10 and Big East for example!.  Exceptions of course, but schools like St. Bonaventure, Seton Hall and LaSalle have a shell of an athletic program with little else than basketball.  I don't want that.  

Does FCS football give a school as many mentions on ESPN as making the NCAA tournament?  Typically no, but I believe winning football is more valuable to the school.  Football cumulative home attendance is still higher than basketball (at least when Lehigh is home).  The Lafayette/Lehigh football game is the defining athletic event of our school, and all some alums care about when it comes to Lafayette sports.
Lafalum

Franks Tanks wrote:
Lafalum wrote:
pardfan wrote:
Eventually we will have to consider ROI (return on investment) as it applies to athletics.  The notoriety we are getting from making this March Madness event tells me that we should approach men's basketball like nothing else matters.  It's relatively cheap--but effective.  Football 150 was nice but we have to wait another 50 years to get that kind of publicity.  Georgetown bringing back football.  What could they be thinking?


I am a supporter of everything Pard, but you make sense!!


Agree to an extent, and many schools throw everything at men's basketball.  Pretty much the entire MAAC, A-10 and Big East for example!.  Exceptions of course, but schools like St. Bonaventure, Seton Hall and LaSalle have a shell of an athletic program with little else than basketball.  I don't want that.  

Does FCS football give a school as many mentions on ESPN as making the NCAA tournament?  Typically no, but I believe winning football is more valuable to the school.  Football cumulative home attendance is still higher than basketball (at least when Lehigh is home).  The Lafayette/Lehigh football game is the defining athletic event of our school, and all some alums care about when it comes to Lafayette sports.


I agree with regard to alums. You are right and I include myself. But to the outside world a sweet sixteen run in basketball would do wonders to our visibility. I don't think its either/ or, but there has to be some rationalization to our approach to athletics and should be clearly defined so everyone knows  what our strategic approach is. If our approach is to search for championships in football, basketball, field hockey, and lacrosse and that's where we will enforce accountability so be it. It takes intelligent, aggressive articulate leadership at several levels, which I have not observed.

I would approach the academic side the same. Film and the performing Arts are a sideshow they don't and shouldn't have equal resources compard to electrical engineering at a school our size.
Franks Tanks

Lafalum wrote:
Franks Tanks wrote:
Lafalum wrote:
pardfan wrote:
Eventually we will have to consider ROI (return on investment) as it applies to athletics.  The notoriety we are getting from making this March Madness event tells me that we should approach men's basketball like nothing else matters.  It's relatively cheap--but effective.  Football 150 was nice but we have to wait another 50 years to get that kind of publicity.  Georgetown bringing back football.  What could they be thinking?


I am a supporter of everything Pard, but you make sense!!


Agree to an extent, and many schools throw everything at men's basketball.  Pretty much the entire MAAC, A-10 and Big East for example!.  Exceptions of course, but schools like St. Bonaventure, Seton Hall and LaSalle have a shell of an athletic program with little else than basketball.  I don't want that.  

Does FCS football give a school as many mentions on ESPN as making the NCAA tournament?  Typically no, but I believe winning football is more valuable to the school.  Football cumulative home attendance is still higher than basketball (at least when Lehigh is home).  The Lafayette/Lehigh football game is the defining athletic event of our school, and all some alums care about when it comes to Lafayette sports.


I agree with regard to alums. You are right and I include myself. But to the outside world a sweet sixteen run in basketball would do wonders to our visibility. I don't think its either/ or, but there has to be some rationalization to our approach to athletics and should be clearly defined so everyone knows  what our strategic approach is. If our approach is to search for championships in football, basketball, field hockey, and lacrosse and that's where we will enforce accountability so be it. It takes intelligent, aggressive articulate leadership at several levels, which I have not observed.

I would approach the academic side the same. Film and the performing Arts are a sideshow they don't and shouldn't have equal resources compard to electrical engineering at a school our size.


Yes, pick a few sports that will be our key bets.  Football, men's & women's basketball, and perhaps filed hockey and women's lax (title IX).  Give these teams a competitive budget, and hold the coaches accountable.  Do our best to compete in other sports, but have different expectations.
Bogus Megapardus

Franks Tanks wrote:
Agree to an extent, and many schools throw everything at men's basketball.  Pretty much the entire MAAC, A-10 and Big East for example!.  Exceptions of course, but schools like St. Bonaventure, Seton Hall and LaSalle have a shell of an athletic program with little else than basketball.  I don't want that.  

Does FCS football give a school as many mentions on ESPN as making the NCAA tournament?  Typically no, but I believe winning football is more valuable to the school.  Football cumulative home attendance is still higher than basketball (at least when Lehigh is home).  The Lafayette/Lehigh football game is the defining athletic event of our school, and all some alums care about when it comes to Lafayette sports.


I agree completely with Franks Tanks.  The "gestalt" of Lafayette athletics never has been to pour everything into a single sport simply to provide the college with some sort of notoriety.  We crossed that bridge aeons ago.

Lafayette is the ultimate over-achieving LAC.  The tiny, academic school providing the opportunity for students to excel in all endeavors.  The NESCAC on steroids, perhaps.  In this regard, I reject any comparison to LaSalle, Seton Hall, Butler, St. Bonnie, St. John's or whomever.  None of those places attracts anywhere near the caliber of student that Lafayette does.

We simply need to do what we do best, and strive to be the best at what we do.  Lafayette cannot be judged by any standard other than its own.  It's a ridiculously high standard, but that's who we are.
bison137

Bogus Megapardus wrote:


Lafayette can compete in lacrosse without max scholarships IF it is an attractive place to play.  Hobart does it without ANY scholarships. Limited scholarships must be offered judiciously to critical positions, i.e. FOGO, Goalie, and a top-shelf long pole (or two) for the D.  There are dozens of smaller, fleet-footed attack out there and we'll never have any trouble getting them.  But that makes no difference if we cannot gain, and maintain, possession.




Agree, although it will take some time.  Bucknell has virtually no lax scholarship money - but it does allocate more grants for need-based aid than LC apparently does.  Still Bucknell spends barely 1/3 of what is being spent by Loyola and Lehigh - who are fully funded - and about 60% of what Colgate spends.   Yet the Bucknell results over the years have been fairly good.

As for Boston U, they definitely will be formidable and will shortly be fully funded.  However, going beyond the funding, their coach has done a very good job identifying talent.   They have a number of sophs who all of the established programs ignored during the recruiting process.  For example, their top midfielder was committed to a NESCAC school until late in his senior year.   Sometimes I wonder if the practice of locking up every recruiting class by the end of the players' junior years isn't somewhat counter-productive.   There seem to always be some players who emerge as seniors and get grabbed up by whoever has some money left - or has an attractive walk-on spot.  In the case of Boston U, they took advantage of this.
Bogus Megapardus

bison137 wrote:
There seem to always be some players who emerge as seniors and get grabbed up by whoever has some money left - or has an attractive walk-on spot.  In the case of Boston U, they took advantage of this.


Indeed.  H.S. lacrosse is a continuing saga of haves and have-nots.  There are communities in which every kid walks around with a lacrosse stick and takes a couple hundred reps off the wall in the parking lot every day because the prevailing social construct compels it.  There are others where kids play lacrosse because they couldn't make the soccer team.  Also, some potentially terrific players at the lax-centric public high schools don't get minutes until they're seniors due to the quality of players ahead of them.  Plus a lot of lesser-talented kids play on "elite" club teams and "all-star" teams simply because they can afford to do so.  The trick often is in finding the diamond in the rough.  In lacrosse, at least, Bucknell and Colgate seem to do this well, year after year.  Lafayette does not.
LeopardPride2013

I understand everyone's frustration particularly with the Navy and BU games.  Understand it all starts with FACEOFFS and the resulting math. Lafayette has won 36% of faceoffs for the season (one of the lowest %'s in D1). The math is Lafayette for the season has scored 41 goals and won 48 faceoffs = 85%. If Lafayette won 50% of faceoffs it would have translated into 19 more possessions and 16 more goals (2+ per game) at the 85% rate. Equally important it would be 19 less possessions for the opponents and less goals against. Take a look at any Patriot League team and you will see the relationship between faceoffs wins and goals is pretty close to 1 to 1. This weakness can be solved quickly by recruiting (or the return of the Hofstra transfer).

To pards4ever and bogus mega pardus who continue to rag the Dmiddies, close D, goalie, team, coach and program in general understand the team is very young. You are quick to point out #'s of those you feel are not performing but never point out current players that are building blocks for the future and are playing well. Take the time to do it by watching full games.  The freshman are the coaches second recruiting class and he is playing them heavily (look at yesterday's game and see how many freshman middies got significant time) in addition to the sophomores. Aside from a part time LSM the entire defense are freshman or sophomores and they will continue to improve.

The coaches need to stay the course for the long haul and be positive with the players. While difficult the players can take losses because they are playing for the love of the sport and the hope of better times to come but they need their parents, fans and coaches to continue to support them in a positive manner. [/u]
Bogus Megapardus

LeopardPride2013 - I get it.  I really do.  But I've been around this game for an awfully long time.  I've mentioned before that I'm the third in a four-generation collegiate lacrosse family so I've seen and lived it all.

I realize it's a young team and a number of upperclassmen have gone by the wayside.  But why is that?

I have nothing but respect and encouragement for the young players trying to make a go of it.  But there seems to be nothing the College is doing to help them out - including the coaching staff.  It's all about restrictions and barriers and "can't do that."

Lord knows I love Lafayette College, all of its programs, and all that the College stands for.  The Maroon Club and the Friends of Lacrosse are spectacular, of course.  But unless the College itself lends a hand this is not going to happen.
pards4ever

lacrosse 2013...its not ragging ...the truth hurts and I'm sorry your son is one of the dmiddies or close d...but we need to get better kids
pards4ever

coach has to keep the best 6 offensive players on the field 90% of the time...attack and middies are interchangable
pards4ever

Leopard pride 2013... The BU team is all freshmen and sophomore and they crushed us... Don't use the excuse we are young... I wasn't at the game yesterday but it just seems the kids,especially the defense quit
pards4ever

Leopard pride 2013... The BU team is all freshmen and sophomore and they crushed us... Don't use the excuse we are young... I wasn't at the game yesterday but it just seems the kids,especially the defense quit
pardfan

Long-time prof at the College (after the 150 museum dinner) expressed to me his concern that this scholarship binge is just misallocated resources (my terms but that was the essence).  So the "that's who we are" stuff is not a unanimous opinion by any means.
Bogus Megapardus

pardfan wrote:
Long-time prof at the College (after the 150 museum dinner) expressed to me his concern that this scholarship binge is just misallocated resources (my terms but that was the essence).  So the "that's who we are" stuff is not a unanimous opinion by any means.


pardfan - not sure how to interpret this.  Did you take the prof to mean that we'll never do better given the administrative restrictions, or that the AD/Coach is not allocating the allowed scholarships properly?
pardfan

Bogus Megapardus wrote:
pardfan wrote:
Long-time prof at the College (after the 150 museum dinner) expressed to me his concern that this scholarship binge is just misallocated resources (my terms but that was the essence).  So the "that's who we are" stuff is not a unanimous opinion by any means.


pardfan - not sure how to interpret this.  Did you take the prof to mean that we'll never do better given the administrative restrictions, or that the AD/Coach is not allocating the allowed scholarships properlyreater ?


Neither.  The gist:  He thinks the scholarship thing is getting out of hand.  I definitely remember his questioning the academic determination of the newer scholarship recipients.  He used the word "entitlement" also.  Meaning that, because of their abilities on the field they are entitled to this reward and can approach their studies as they see fit.  That's not all recipients, to be sure.  But...it is something to ponder.  Have known him for yrs although he wasn't at the College when I attended.
Lafalum

pardfan wrote:
Bogus Megapardus wrote:
pardfan wrote:
Long-time prof at the College (after the 150 museum dinner) expressed to me his concern that this scholarship binge is just misallocated resources (my terms but that was the essence).  So the "that's who we are" stuff is not a unanimous opinion by any means.


pardfan - not sure how to interpret this.  Did you take the prof to mean that we'll never do better given the administrative restrictions, or that the AD/Coach is not allocating the allowed scholarships properlyreater ?


Neither.  The gist:  He thinks the scholarship thing is getting out of hand.  I definitely remember his questioning the academic determination of the newer scholarship recipients.  He used the word "entitlement" also.  Meaning that, because of their abilities on the field they are entitled to this reward and can approach their studies as they see fit.  That's not all recipients, to be sure.  But...it is something to ponder.  Have known him for yrs although he wasn't at the College when I attended.


The answer of course is the scholarship recipient of today is better prepared and performs better in the classroom than previous financial aid recipients. I have seen the data and that is a fact. in addition, the graduation rates are higher. No more money is being spent, therefore the total "ROI." if you will is higher. This educator is uninformed. However, without constantly reinforcing the data by our AD or higher this will come up again as I have stated often on this board.
Bogus Megapardus

pardfan wrote:
Neither.  The gist:  He thinks the scholarship thing is getting out of hand.  I definitely remember his questioning the academic determination of the newer scholarship recipients.  He used the word "entitlement" also.  Meaning that, because of their abilities on the field they are entitled to this reward and can approach their studies as they see fit.  That's not all recipients, to be sure.  But...it is something to ponder.  Have known him for yrs although he wasn't at the College when I attended.


OK, I get it.  Same ol' same ol.'  The question is whether Lafayette chooses to accept a lacrosse player versus a non-lacrosse player - both having the same academic ability and credentials.  The net-net financial aid delta is the prof's sticking point.  Or is there more to it, from the prof's point of view? Evil or Very Mad
pardfan

Surprising to hear anything--even a teensy-weensy bit-- negative at such an occasion (150 dinner and big game weekend).  He's a club-sport fan who wants only academically-driven students on campus. Period.  He must see SOMETHING that concerns him. (Lafalum's comments--which make sense--notwithstanding.)
Bogus Megapardus

pardfan wrote:
Surprising to hear anything--even a teensy-weensy bit-- negative at such an occasion (150 dinner and big game weekend).  He's a club-sport fan who wants only academically-driven students on campus. Period.  He must see SOMETHING that concerns him. (Lafalum's comments--which make sense--notwithstanding.)


Hey, I want only academically-driven students on campus, too.  I keep wondering how that's inconsistent with recruiting top-flight. PL-caliber athletes, however.

Unless, of course, there's a built-in faculty bias against athletes qua students . . . .
Lafalum

Bogus Megapardus wrote:
pardfan wrote:
Neither.  The gist:  He thinks the scholarship thing is getting out of hand.  I definitely remember his questioning the academic determination of the newer scholarship recipients.  He used the word "entitlement" also.  Meaning that, because of their abilities on the field they are entitled to this reward and can approach their studies as they see fit.  That's not all recipients, to be sure.  But...it is something to ponder.  Have known him for yrs although he wasn't at the College when I attended.


OK, I get it.  Same ol' same ol.'  The question is whether Lafayette chooses to accept a lacrosse player versus a non-lacrosse player - both having the same academic ability and credentials.  The net-net financial aid delta is the prof's sticking point.  Or is there more to it, from the prof's point of view? Evil or Very Mad


Bogus, for some people it is just a matter ideology. I'm sure if you bounced a ball in his direction it would smack him in the face. An athlete to him is a knuckle dragging cretin. During a conversation with a "long time" Bot member in 2003 that's exactly how our student athletes were described. June Schluter was standing with us at the time and walked away from this obviously intoxicated drunk to her credit. He is no longer on the BOT.
Bogus Megapardus

Lafalum wrote:
Bogus, for some people it is just a matter ideology. I'm sure if you bounced a ball in his direction it would smack him in the face. An athlete to him is a knuckle dragging cretin. During a conversation with a "long time" Bot member in 2003 that's exactly how our student athletes were described. June Schluter was standing with us at the time and walked away from this obviously intoxicated drunk to her credit. He is no longer on the BOT.


Prof. Schluter is my idol.  She resurrected me from my lowly, horrendous public school depths and taught me all that I am today.  I kid not.  I've been told by some that I have "a way with words."  If you had any idea how often I credit Prof. Schluter for my ability to write, to think, to express . . .

Thank goodness for Prof. Schluter!  I caution every noob on this board NEVER to take Prof. Schluter's name in vein!  Shocked



NB:  Prof. Schluter's guidance is the direct inspiration for the Frankosaurus Chalkboard, too.  She taught me about Shakespearean parody. So it's her fault, Coach T.  Not mine! Cool
BPard

Lafalum wrote:
Guys you have to consider reality.
1) when Lafayette instituted scholarships and the agreement was we would spend no more on scholarships than we spent on need based aid.( As a result friends of football must raise enough money to add one scholarship to get us to 58 which is critical to get a BCS team to play us for money.)
2) For every men's scholarship this must be an equivalent women's scholarship.
3) Football is taking 57 scholarships now, Boston has no football team neither does American or does Loyola.
4) we are the smallest PL school at the moment with 23 sports.

One or more of the above must change in order for us to fully fund men's lacrosse, or even 1/2 fund it.

Is scholarship allocation data available somewhere or is this information only available to those in the know with coaches and/or the AD?

To other points:
1) Agreement with whom? Ourselves?
2-3) So what? That means we should have more women's scholarships in other sports, so why hasn't that translated to success in women's athletics? Seems that something else is the issue, not the scholarship parity between men and women, even with football.
4) Grow enrollment (25% over 10 yrs) to better cover the fixed costs of those 23 sports and so student athletes make up a smaller percentage of the student body. Just please, please, only add students (62 per year) and faculty (9 per year). Keep the size of the administration the same. If support staff (janitorial/dining) need to grow with the variable cost, OK. At the end of 10 years, we have a 3,000 student body, a stu/fac ratio approaching 9:1, the same # of athletes, and a broader base.

Back to the point of this thread, the largest challenge with lax for 3+ years has been possession and FOGO. Money won't fix this.
Lafalum

The agreement was with the faculty who were sold based on the above.( Shared governance?? I agree we should have more success. However women's lacrosse and soccer have only had scholarships for two years and will reach a full complement in two years. Women's basketball has 13 I believe and we have seen those results. Field Hockey had 8 and will have the full complement in two years but they have had back to back pl championships and a national rank of 10 and two NCAA appearances. The past two years they have underachieved with a very strong schedule. They had two final four teams on the schedule. Softball gets a few and we all know   about the coaching issues. Your last point should be considered.

       Lafayette Sports Fan Forum Forum Index -> Men's Lacrosse
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum