Yes, he was. But Clawson requested permission to negotiate with Richmond, and permission was granted. Clawson didn't renege on a deal. He was given permission to pursue the opening. -- 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: Yes, he was. But Clawson requested permission to negotiate with Richmond, and permission was granted. Clawson didn't renege on a deal. He was given permission to pursue the opening.

Author:
JoltinJoe
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 13:56:50 03/02/05 Wed
In reply to: Jimbo65 's message, "Very odd indeed. Presumably the UR administration was less than candid with Coach C in the pre-hire discussions. Perhaps an example of the best action being no action. Hey hindsight is 20/20. Also, in terms of honoring commitment, wasn't Coach commited to FU for additional years?" on 13:45:28 03/02/05 Wed

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

Replies:

Subject Author Date

Re: Let's face it, respected collegaues; this has opened the door for Fordham to make the step up in football if they so choose. Rambacker, your sources have any thoughts on an FU cross-over into CAA FB in '07? (NT) Go...'gate 14:51:13 03/02/05 Wed

as much as I'd prefer to play scholarship football, I'm not holding my breath. Fr. McShance has said on more than 1 occassion that we're not upgrading football. (NT) -- bfg, 16:01:52 03/02/05 Wed
The CAA/A-10 will welcome us. Our NY location, academic standing & quality program help. We'll be in the driver's seat. What's critical is where football nets out in our internal/external study when it's done in the Fall. Everything will fall from that, including the future of Ram football. With the major expansion of the university at Lincoln Center, new Marymount campus, Science Center, Campus Center, Recreation facility, to me it makes sense to step up to scholarship football. I don't think we'll have an answer until '06 on this, given the timing of the release of the study. (NT) -- Rambacker, 17:03:12 03/02/05 Wed

For those alums and students that would like to see us join the new CAA league, I suggest that you makes those opinions known to Fr. McShane and the Board. (NT) -- Rambacker, 17:11:24 03/02/05 Wed
Maybe, but Hofstra may still have a voice in the discussion as a full CAA member. Can't see the Dutchmen rooting for another New York school in the mix.** (NT) -- DFW HOYA, 19:23:56 03/02/05 Wed

Hofstra doesn't have much juice with the league. Plus Fordham will better deliver the NY market. (NT) -- Rambacker, 22:25:37 03/02/05 Wed

Who the hell are you, Rambacker, to speak so dispositively on every issue? You pretend to be in the know, far above us poor alumni but are you are a fake? . You have been asked before. Who are you. If not a name, then a year of graduation (if you are alumnus) -- anything that gives you credibility. Otherwise, I join the other posters who you see you as a nut with a "mission" of being big time in everything except academics. (NT) -- not convinced, 20:07:32 03/02/05 Wed

"not convinced"? Your post becomes instantly questionable based on the moniker alone. But more precisely, it's clear that you don't read my posts carefully. I have always espoused high academic standards for Fordham and always will. You sound like one of those fossils that believe Fordham cannot maintain high academic standards and also have a winning, national athletic program. Your type of thinking is passe - Fordham is moving toward a future of success at the highest level academically and athletically. You can watch while we do it, if you choose. Best of luck living in the 50's. (NT) -- Rambacker, 22:10:42 03/02/05 Wed

Re: The CAA/A-10 will welcome us. Our NY location, academic standing & quality program help. We'll be in the driver's seat. What's critical is where football nets out in our internal/external study when it's done in the Fall. Everything will fall from that, including the future of Ram football. With the major expansion of the university at Lincoln Center, new Marymount campus, Science Center, Campus Center, Recreation facility, to me it makes sense to step up to scholarship football. I don't think we'll have an answer until '06 on this, given the timing of the release of the study. -- JCC, 21:49:37 03/02/05 Wed

If you read the article on the Lincoln Center expansion, it says that Fordham's enrollment will increase dramatically in the future. This will increase our operating budget and as our alumni base increases, so will contributions. This would enable us to support Div. 1-A football if we want. I'm not saying it will happen - just saying there may be more justification for it in the future given our increased stature, need to recruit nationally, etc. (NT) -- Rambacker, 22:04:09 03/02/05 Wed

I hope you're right, but I'm not so sure. First of all, much of the additional space at LC will be used by grad and law students. People in grad programs in education and social service aren't generally big contributors, nor do they take much interest in Fordham sports. While Fordham Law grads are more generous contributors, they tend to focus donations on the Law School, unless they also did their undergrad work at FU. As for the LC undergrads, many of them are hip, artsy, urban types who aren't much interested in sports, or anything else at Rose Hill. More.... (NT) -- Ram'69, 10:50:10 03/03/05 Thu
....While I'm convinced that better football (& basketball) WOULD dramatically expand applicant pools to our undergraduate programs at Rose Hill, I'm less certain that they would have the same effect at LC. Given the University's modest financial resources--and considering the new administration's tremendous interest in upgrading Lincoln Center--I've got the feeling that sports and other programs at Rose Hill inevitably will command less attention. Rose Hill has always been the University's flagship campus, and I hope that I'm wrong about some of these matters. (NT) -- Ram'69, 11:04:51 03/03/05 Thu

Frankly, I believe that the administration needs to make the completion ot the Rose Hill campus a priority, at least as high a one as the Lincoln Center expansion. It is our flagship campus, but has never been completed. Rose Hill is the common core of the university - we need a new campus center, science center, combined recreation complex/convocations center, football stadium, probably another dorm, Collins Hall refurbishment, etc. There's a lot to be done to finish our core campus. (NT) -- Rambacker, 15:55:47 03/03/05 Thu

It's time to launch a campaign, similar to what has happend at Richmond over the past week, to contact the Admin and the BOT and tell them how we think Fordham should proceed. (NT) -- bfg, 17:10:13 03/03/05 Thu

I couldn't agree more. If we don't, we could end up with an athletic program and a Rose Hill campus that does not match our insititutional goals. (NT) -- Rambacker, 22:04:49 03/03/05 Thu