Consulting f. announcement puts Pres."skin in game" - Lafayette Sports Fan Forum



Lafayette Sports Fan Forum Forum Index


Lafayette Sports Fan Forum > Football > 
--- Consulting f. announcement puts Pres."skin in game"

Reply to topic

Must be logged in to watch topics

Posted:

Please Register and Login to this forum to stop seeing this advertising.













  
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 12:46 am

ed65View user's profile






Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 856


Location: New York City





NewXbo wrote:
This seems like it's a replay of the Eve Atkinson era.


No way this is a replay of that nonsensical travesty.  The issue on the table is how to be competitive in the PL.  Not to drop to D-III.

 Reply with quote
  
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 5:39 am

seenalotView user's profile






Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 1424







We all hope you are right.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 6:06 am

LafalumView user's profile






Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 3889







A guarantee would be to have prominent alumni ( non BOT) on the committee who would go nuts publicly if Div 3 were considered or dropping football. ( I do not believe that dropping football or div 3  on the table).

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 7:22 pm

SIDELINERView user's profile






Joined: 13 Oct 2008
Posts: 657


Location: PA





I've heard often that the chairman of the BoT cares nothing about athletics and that most of the board feels that way. Can anyone tell us who on the board might act FAVORABLY toward athletics?  I've been told that the BoT met on the Saturday of Homecoming weekend and after the meeting, all of them left the college without making even a cursory appearance at the football game. Does that sound right? Is there's that much nonchalance about the most visible sport, what can anyone hope for from this study?

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 8:01 pm

flyfisherView user's profile






Joined: 11 Dec 2012
Posts: 1306







[quote="SIDELINER:57537"]I've heard often that the chairman of the BoT cares nothing about athletics and that most of the board feels that way. Can anyone tell us who on the board might act FAVORABLY toward athletics? I've been told that the BoT met on the Saturday of Homecoming weekend and after the meeting, all of them left the college without making even a cursory appearance at the football game. Does that sound right? Is there's that much nonchalance aabout the most visible sport, what can anyone hope for from this study?[/quote


Your comments are very accurate. Especially about the chairman of the Board of Trustees. I did see a couple at the game after the meeting. Neither were sitting but hanging out near the Coca-Cola Zone. I understand that the focus at Lafayette College needs to be on the growth of the college and the financials. However your assessment is correct that there is very little love for athletics among the Board of Trustees.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 11:39 pm

ed65View user's profile






Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 856


Location: New York City





[quote="flyfisher:57538"]
SIDELINER wrote:
I've heard often that the chairman of the BoT cares nothing about athletics and that most of the board feels that way. Can anyone tell us who on the board might act FAVORABLY toward athletics? I've been told that the BoT met on the Saturday of Homecoming weekend and after the meeting, all of them left the college without making even a cursory appearance at the football game. Does that sound right? Is there's that much nonchalance aabout the most visible sport, what can anyone hope for from this study?[/quote


Your comments are very accurate. Especially about the chairman of the Board of Trustees. I did see a couple at the game after the meeting. Neither were sitting but hanging out near the Coca-Cola Zone. I understand that the focus at Lafayette College needs to be on the growth of the college and the financials. However your assessment is correct that there is very little love for athletics among the Board of Trustees.


There are definite exceptions to the anti athletics Board Members including Bob Sell, Hal Kamine, Jim Fisher, Bruce Maggin, David Reif and others so let's not be too quick to condemn the entire group.  One of the women trustees gives money to Field Hockey.  Now, I am as critical of the Board as any of you, but we need to be fair here.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2016 4:27 am

SIDELINERView user's profile






Joined: 13 Oct 2008
Posts: 657


Location: PA





I didn't really mean to broad-brush the members of the BoT and I thank you for the names of some who would have interest in the betterment of the program in all areas. Now, will any of those men be included on the committee? Would any scream out, as Lafalum mentions, if they saw things they don't like? I suppose only time will tell.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2016 9:08 am

ed65View user's profile






Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 856


Location: New York City





SIDELINER wrote:
I didn't really mean to broad-brush the members of the BoT and I thank you for the names of some who would have interest in the betterment of the program in all areas. Now, will any of those men be included on the committee? Would any scream out, as Lafalum mentions, if they saw things they don't like? I suppose only time will tell.


Clearly. as you point out, the key is who is on the committee.  Also, several of us have written Alison to recommend that at least two non Trustee Alums (who support winning in athletics) be appointed to the committee.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2016 9:38 am

LafalumView user's profile






Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 3889







[quote="ed65:57541"]
flyfisher wrote:
SIDELINER wrote:
I've heard often that the chairman of the BoT cares nothing about athletics and that most of the board feels that way. Can anyone tell us who on the board might act FAVORABLY toward athletics? I've been told that the BoT met on the Saturday of Homecoming weekend and after the meeting, all of them left the college without making even a cursory appearance at the football game. Does that sound right? Is there's that much nonchalance aabout the most visible sport, what can anyone hope for from this study?[/quote


Your comments are very accurate. Especially about the chairman of the Board of Trustees. I did see a couple at the game after the meeting. Neither were sitting but hanging out near the Coca-Cola Zone. I understand that the focus at Lafayette College needs to be on the growth of the college and the financials. However your assessment is correct that there is very little love for athletics among the Board of Trustees.


There are definite exceptions to the anti athletics Board Members including Bob Sell, Hal Kamine, Jim Fisher, Bruce Maggin, David Reif and others so let's not be too quick to condemn the entire group. One of the women trustees gives money to Field Hockey. Now, I am as critical of the Board as any of you, but we need to be fair here.


You can add Jim Birle '83, Michael Heaney '86 and Don Morel all of whom made substantial 6 figure gifts for athletic capital improvements. Barbara Levy and Judd Linville are also supporters.

There are a significant number of emeritus members who are VERY anti athletic and whose appearance would be a bad sign including Arthur Rothkof, Dan Weiss, and Wiilliam Rutledge and a number of other Rothkopf followers. If their names appeared would in my opinion hurt the credibility of the effort.

Likewise I think of a number of faculty I would like to see on it like Alan Childs and Susan Averett. I'll leave off other faculty I think would be a bad sign.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2016 3:18 pm

Pards RuleView user's profile






Joined: 02 Apr 2007
Posts: 1897


Location: Cherry Hill, NJ





Put Pards Rule on the committee!!!!

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2016 4:03 pm

Franks TanksView user's profile






Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 3273







J.B. Reilly should be supportive as well. I heard he has a Lafayette football helmet, and other Pard football stuff, in his office!

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2016 5:16 pm

LafalumView user's profile






Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 3889







Franks Tanks wrote:
J.B. Reilly should be supportive as well. I heard he has a Lafayette football helmet, and other Pard football stuff, in his office!


You are correct!!!

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2016 7:27 pm

SIDELINERView user's profile






Joined: 13 Oct 2008
Posts: 657


Location: PA





In September of 2008, Lafalum posted the following:

"I can verify that statement. I can also verify that the athletic dept is short one trainer resulting in lack of coverage for some sports at practice and at away games. I can verify that many asst coaches are not paid even minimum wage and to call them full time employees is a joke. I can also verify if it wasn't for the generosity of the many people who donate to the "Friends of " organizations we'd be a terrible fix!! And a shout out to a strong group of committed, large donors who without their support we'd be playing Moravian in our "big" rivalry games.
The BOT has done squat for athletics and it has been these alumni that have gotten it done when needed.!!"

Does it sound at all like things are pretty much the same today?

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2016 9:05 pm

ed65View user's profile






Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 856


Location: New York City





Again, I don't agree with you Sideliner.  I don't think things are pretty much the same today.  The fact that the committee is being formed and the consulting firm has been hired is very positive.  And I am as cynical as you are AND have been dealing with the athletics issue for 50 years.  Let's see what happens with this initiative and not judge it before we see the report.  Again, let's be fair here.  if you count up the Board Members listed as positive, it is a substantial number.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 8:08 pm

flyfisherView user's profile






Joined: 11 Dec 2012
Posts: 1306







[quote="ed65:57541"]
flyfisher wrote:
SIDELINER wrote:
I've heard often that the chairman of the BoT cares nothing about athletics and that most of the board feels that way. Can anyone tell us who on the board might act FAVORABLY toward athletics? I've been told that the BoT met on the Saturday of Homecoming weekend and after the meeting, all of them left the college without making even a cursory appearance at the football game. Does that sound right? Is there's that much nonchalance aabout the most visible sport, what can anyone hope for from this study?[/quote


Your comments are very accurate. Especially about the chairman of the Board of Trustees. I did see a couple at the game after the meeting. Neither were sitting but hanging out near the Coca-Cola Zone. I understand that the focus at Lafayette College needs to be on the growth of the college and the financials. However your assessment is correct that there is very little love for athletics among the Board of Trustees.


There are definite exceptions to the anti athletics Board Members including Bob Sell, Hal Kamine, Jim Fisher, Bruce Maggin, David Reif and others so let's not be too quick to condemn the entire group. One of the women trustees gives money to Field Hockey. Now, I am as critical of the Board as any of you, but we need to be fair here.


Obviously some of the BOT care about sports, especially those families that have their names on facilities. All of said was I saw two of them at the game. There could have been 50 of them for all I know. I only know or have met 5-6 of them. Someone made the comment that none of them were there and I knew that was incorrect. However I als know there several/many that are not as supportive of athletics as we would hope.

Some things are more clear to me now. We have 2000 students. We need to grow to some degree. It would s hard to grow in STEM majors with so few students. Someone else mentioned that last week. Some engineering classes have already been cut the last few years. Byerly has a lot of long term issues to address. I doubt athletics is at the top, though still important.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 8:21 pm

bethlehempardView user's profile






Joined: 28 Sep 2011
Posts: 2082







Conceding that there is a problem is a huge step forward.
American steel and auto companies didn't do that. Baylor football didn't do that. Lehman didn't do that.
Just knowing that leadership has noticed and cares and is moving forward is big. What matters most is the goal: competitiveness in the Patriot League. The admission is of course that we aren't.
I do understand the wariness for the veterans of "The Study."
Consider though that just a few days ago, the impression among fans was that nobody gave a damn.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 9:01 pm

BPardView user's profile






Joined: 23 Sep 2014
Posts: 208







flyfisher wrote:
Some things are more clear to me now. We have 2000 students. We need to grow to some degree. It would s hard to grow in STEM majors with so few students.
You're off by over 20% on the size of the College.

It's a lot easier to get to 3,000 when you're already at 2,500 than if you're actually starting at 2,000.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 10:49 pm

SIDELINERView user's profile






Joined: 13 Oct 2008
Posts: 657


Location: PA





Three most recent Reinhard blogs pertain to sports studies -- one a reaction to the college release and two others old columns from the Eve Atkinson era.

www.ramblingsfromthebench.blogspot.com

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 2:59 am

LafalumView user's profile






Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 3889







SIDELINER wrote:
Three most recent Reinhard blogs pertain to sports studies -- one a reaction to the college release and two others old columns from the Eve Atkinson era.

www.ramblingsfromthebench.blogspot.com

Excellent article....couldn't have said it better myself. He has a great feel for the issues!! No doubt the announcement has put some fears in some places. I am sure there are administrators that are uneasy, as are some coaches. No one likes change and this "study" implies and says change. The appointment of visible non BOT alumni to the committee is key and will say a lot. I await that announcement.

Reply with quote
  
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:12 am

NewXboView user's profile






Joined: 03 Feb 2014
Posts: 815







Well, it is an interesting article. However, it seems that he is suggesting that appointing the "money boys" to the committee is the answer.  Sure, money will be important to improve facilities, better pay for assistants, etc. but that alone will not guarantee success.

The issue is how do recruit better athletes.


_________________
Social Media - A toxic crucible of negativity

Reply with quote
  
Reply to topic Page 2 of 4
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 Previous Thread | Next Thread 

Posting Rules
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Jump to:  
All times are GMT - 5 Hours

The time now is Thu Jun 29, 2017 5:50 am

phpvBB - Lafayette Sports Fan Forum - Top - MODs

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Visit Justinsanity.net for all your phpvBB needs.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group.
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum