Scheduling -- FORDHAM RAMS FOOTBALL FORUM

>

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4], 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

Subject: Scheduling

Author:
JohnG92
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 20:55:52 12/09/04 Thu

I spoke to a Fordham official today with regard to scheduling.

As far as Army goes, the university has initiated talks with Army about meeting on the gridiron. Fordham wants to play either Army or Navy. I don't know that any deal has been completed, but I know Fordham has been pushing to get on Army's schedule. Fordham recognizes the benefits from such a game. Let's hope something can be worked out.

Coach Foley has said that he hopes to schedule with Harvard. Again, I don't know if any deal has been struck, but they are a team Coach Foley wants to play.

I also believe that Dave Clawson at Richmond would be willing to schedule Fordham.

Yale is on the schedule in '08 as we know.

As far as the schedule through 2007 goes, I suspect that it was made several years ago when Dave was trying to get wins to get the program competitive. He may not have had final say but definitely had a lot of input.

Efforts are being made to get the kind of teams we all want to see on the schedule.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject Author Date

Sorry, JohnG92, for being the skeptic but I gotta see it to believe it! What is Frank waiting for? Oh, now I get it. He's waiting for Army to turn its program into a winning one. Then Army will be on our schedule. DUH, what was I thinking? (NT) Ram It '66 22:39:24 12/09/04 Thu

I find your post questionable. We heard several years ago that we would be playing Yale in 2005 and 2006 and that never happened. Why would Army play us when we don't have a stadium to host them for a return home game? And wanting to play Harvard is very different than seeing them on the schedule. The fact remains that the schedule for the next 4 seasons is incredibly unattractive for alums, students and recruits. Some heads should roll. (NT) Rambacker 23:10:07 12/09/04 Thu

Not sure it's realistic to expect any return games from any I-A team, especially without at least a 15K stadium and I would say even with one. Army didn't give HC a return game and they certainly have the capacity. Not sure yet that heads should roll but pointed questions should be asked. (NT) -- DamnRam, 08:39:15 12/10/04 Fri

If Army is going to play a 1AA school, I can't see them playing on the road. They played Yale, Colgate and Holy Cross in the '90's but I think it was always at home. Maybe someone in the administration will take notice of how bad the schedule is and make some changes. Games get changed all the time. I'm sure for $10K and two years notice Marist and Duquesne would take the check and find a new opponent (NT) -- An Old Coach, 10:29:37 12/10/04 Fri

You want me to change some of these games? No way. I spent alot of time putting these schedules together and I'm ot going back and redoing my work. (NT) -- FXMcL, 12:48:27 12/10/04 Fri

I find your post confusing. Do you think I'm lying, or being lied to? (NT) -- JohnG92, 20:43:15 12/10/04 Fri

I believe you are being misled and frankly, used. Dave Clawson did not want, nor did he plan to have, the schedule that's been released. I would suggest that you consider the source of your information. Who did you talk to? (NT) -- Rambacker, 22:01:40 12/10/04 Fri

Without directly getting that from Dave I'm not sure how you can make that statement. When he was here I spoke to him on several occasions and recruiting and getting enough wins was always at the top of his agenda, as it should have been. As to who I spoke to, I wouldn't want to say unless that person approved. I do know that Fordham has been actively trying to schedule Army, and that Coach Foley wants Harvard. It doesn't seem to me that anyone is content playing only mid major OOC games. (NT) -- JohnG92, 09:21:59 12/11/04 Sat

Dave Clawson wanted to upgrade the schedule, not downgrade it. The new schedule is not his doing. (NT) -- Rambacker, 12:13:58 12/11/04 Sat

There's a post from Prince that references a conversation they had w/Clawson where he defended the logic of playing a patsy OOC schedule. Are you saying that Clawson's opinion changed once the program was better established and he thought we could now handle better teams or that Prince got it wrong? FWIW, I remember Dave stating the preference for weaker OOC opponents at one of the Gridiron Club meetings but that was before our PL title. (NT) -- PA Ram, 10:22:48 03/04/05 Fri

Coffey's 7,000 seat capacity is not limiting Fordham's ability to schedule Army (or Harvard). In fact, Army writes $75,000 checks to keep its few 1-AA opponents from whining all the way to Michie for what Army hopes will be Christians vs. Lions entertainment for its fans. Army even resisted its home and home series with UConn --- a cash cow for both schools. (NT) -- Ramses, 16:35:59 03/02/05 Wed

I would be surprised if Dave Clawson really wanted that weak a schedule that far into his tenure. Did he really expect the program to still be at the point that he could not schedule a little tougher? I always knew Dave to have very lofty goals and for him to schedule down like that would go against the type of person I feel he is. Obviously I may be wrong on that, but that is just the way I read him. (NT) J�Dete93 20:49:18 12/10/04 Fri

I would concur. I spoke to him about two years ago, right after the playoff year and he said he was working to add villanova and hofstra but wasn't getting much help. I don't know if he meant from those schools or internally but he thought those games woud make sense. (NT) -- An Old Coach, 07:49:10 12/11/04 Sat
I was told that Dave had a large degree of control over who he wanted on the schedule. It is possible one of these mid major games may have been a late addition. I think we all agree that these games don't excite us. Based on some of the comments though, I don't think anyone intentionally scheduled down to undercut the program's growth. Why would anybody do that? BTW, hope you're getting some sleep at night JoDete! (NT) -- JohnG92, 09:13:55 12/11/04 Sat
Add the inability to schedule quality OOC opponents as another reason for Clawson's departure, and let's be realistic Dave never thought he'd still be at FU for the 2005-2008 seasons. He had a 5-year plan and he executed well. I agree JohnG92, nothing was done intentionally to undercut the program, but lack of vision and poor AD management have weakened FU's position comparatively. (NT) -- Smar Llabtoof, 13:38:23 12/12/04 Sun

We used to have OOC games with Villanova, Hofstra, Harvard, Penn, and Princeton. Hofstra-Fordham used to be a pretty good rivalry. I'd like to see them back on the schedule. (NT) -- JohnG92, 20:18:45 12/12/04 Sun

Why play competitive programs likely to attract decent crowds when you can play the Marists, Duquesnes, and Cupcake Colleges of the world? (NT) -- Cynic, 13:42:01 12/13/04 Mon

Re: Scheduling football guy 20:46:25 03/02/05 Wed

Thanks for the info, JG. The only thing that's tough is that alot of what's listed falls into the category of good intentions v. something already in the works. I hope your Army comment is one thing that is actually in the works, though. What about Navy? Someone said we screwed them over 10 years ago (see thread below). Anyone here know any details behind that? Thanks again, JG (NT) PA Ram 20:49:21 03/02/05 Wed