Whither thou goest -- 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: Whither thou goest

Author:
OldRam
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 13:13:07 12/09/04 Thu

Obviously this scheduling problem has been brewing for a long time. We basically have been playing the same schedule the last three years with some minor exceptions. The only Ivies we've played are Brown and Columbia and we lose Brown after next year. Apparently, for whatever reason (and I'm sure our lack of facilities has played a large part), we along with Georgetown are being boycotted by the rest of the Ivies who have no trouble scheduling Lehigh, Colgate, Lafayette, Bucknell and even Holy Cross. Apart from the A-10 teams, there are no other 1AA teams in the East other than the Marists, Albanys, etc. I am sure that our coaches don't have anything to do with the scheduling other than getting a "filler' game here and there. That is the Fordham dilemma...where do we go from here?

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

Replies:

Subject Author Date

The Ivies aren't boycotting us or G-Town. They are boycotting our facility. Yale agreed to schedule us starting in 2008 after we had demonstrated an intention to install a FieldTurf field. The Ivies may not play big-time football anymore, but they are used to first-rate facilities. The grass field at Coffey had a reputation as one of the one surfaces in I-AA football. When the Ivies had to schedule Fordham as part of the PL/Ivy scheduling agreement, they hated coming to Coffey. Once released from that scheduling obligation, few Ivies kept Fordham on the schedule. (NT) JoltinJoe 15:37:49 12/09/04 Thu

Thanks for the info. I know it's semantics but they are boycotting us until we do something about our facilities.I assume that if/when we fix the field, the other Ivies will follow? I am sure they also don't like having all the seats on one side of the field. Meanwhile...what? (NT) OldRam 16:00:56 12/09/04 Thu

All I was saying that the Ivies don't have something "personal" against Fordham, they just didn't like our field. You know, "It's business, not personal." But as Smar points out below, we've had a substandard facility for a long time. Our out-of-conference schedule consists of teams with similar substandard facilities. From a facilities standpoint, you reap what you sow, I guess. If you wonder why Lehigh gets top-notch OOC games, and we don't, just spend an afternoon at Goodman Stadium one Saturday afternoon, and the answer will become obvious. (NT) -- JoltinJoe, 16:13:07 12/09/04 Thu

I think being in the same town as Columbia plays a factor in this. After all, the Ivies already get their NYC exposure by playing Columbia so we don't really offer them anything new there. Yes our facilities are substandard, but our marketing and fan relations program is almost non-existent and it shows in our mediocre attendance. Also, the fan experience suffers from the poor concessions and lack of opposing bleachers. I know that Fordham has absolutely huge upside potential, especially with the FieldTurf and lights, and now it's a question of whether Fordham wants to reap the benefits. (NT) -- DamnRam, 19:26:19 12/09/04 Thu

DamnRam - You and I agree on just about every issue concerning Fordham Athletics. But you must understand something - our installation of FieldTurf on Coffey Field is a stopgap, temporary measure to stabilize our facilties so we can function at our current level. If we want to be successful in the future, we MUST build a real football stadium and Convocations Center ASAP. Your comments on the board make it seem like these stopgap measures are permament. If they are, we will be an also-ran in sports for many years to come. I hope you realize that. (NT) -- Rambacker, 20:48:08 12/09/04 Thu

We are actually in agreement on the overall points but I think in disagreement over timeframes. (more inside) -- DamnRam, 09:09:39 12/10/04 Fri

I disagree on the timing issue. With a professional AD and staff we can begin promoting properly and combined with a competitve program in football and basketball, get plenty of fans much sooner to games. You get what you wish for - if we make it clear that we don't expect first rate atheltic facilties for 10 years, that's what will happen. If alums make it clear that we want a capital campaign created now for this purpose, we have a good chance of seeing that happen. Let's not lower our expectations. (NT) -- Rambacker, 08:37:03 12/11/04 Sat

It's not a matter of getting what you wish for, it's a matter of getting what we have earned. We only have what 5-6 home games a year, and we don't come close to filling the stands for more than 1 or 2 of those. I think it would take easily 5-10 years to build up the fan base, pack the stands we have, and raise the funds for a new stadium. Given that realistic scenario, during that time we might as well have at least a decent field, lights, and renovated lockerrooms. With our very low giving rate (now down to 13%) the alums have made things crystal clear. (NT) -- DamnRam, 15:37:37 12/11/04 Sat

That's the way Fordham has done it in the past. We will be doing things differently in the future. When the management study is finished, we will be taking action immediately on capital projects. The timeframe can be much faster, and should be if we make it a priority. You'll be surprised how quickly things will happen starting next year. In the interim, I would suggest not adding fuel to the arguments of those who resist positive change. Athletics time has come, and we will see action. Be a believer, not someone willing to wait a decade. (NT) -- Rambacker, 21:04:11 12/11/04 Sat

Your post about expecting quick action doesn't make sense -- DamnRam, 14:04:45 12/12/04 Sun

For several reasons, I won't get into specifics here as far as projected capital planning. Let me just say this - it is important that all alums make their opinions clear if you'd like to see state-of-the-art athletic facilities. It can happen if we work to make it happen. The current capital campaign will be replaced soon by another, which could include athletic facilties. It's up to us. But posting that it can't happen for 10 years is innacurate and detrimental to this effort. (NT) -- Rambacker, 22:33:12 12/12/04 Sun

Not only Ivies, but also recruits, fans, alums and every legitimate, non mid-major 1-AA conference boycotts FU because of facilities. This is nothing new, FU knew this in 1989 when we made the jump and they never fixed the problem. Unfortunately, the current renovation project sounds like more of a band-aid than a solution. Or, perhaps, the AD knew how bad the schedule looked for 2005-2007, so he figured why upgrade. (NT) Smar Llabtoof 16:07:34 12/09/04 Thu

What came first...the chicken or the egg (NT) -- OldRam, 16:19:35 12/09/04 Thu

tough question to answer...one things is for sure, those managing FU athletics continue to lay egg after egg after egg...Clawson was a mircle worker, he literally made filet mignon from ground beef, but he knew it was still ground beef and he left before it was served...Go Spiders (NT) -- Smar Llabtoof, 17:30:04 12/09/04 Thu

We can't undo the past. However we can look to the present and beyond. The upgrades that are underway are very significant and should more or less, resolve the facilities problem. If at all possible, I would like to know if the upgrades will include the temp seating on the visitor side. That would be a real plus in conjunction with the rest of the upgrades. Yale comes on in 08 and hopefully we will have a better schedule in place at that time. (NT) FC 17:45:42 12/09/04 Thu

Are you kidding? FieldTurf on Coffey Field "resolves the facilities problem"? That is an amazing statement. Until Fordham builds a real football stadium and a Convocations Center, we will be second class citiizens in the world of college athletics. Let's get real here, and right now. (NT) -- Rambacker, 20:52:49 12/09/04 Thu

I think "temporarily resolves certain problems" would have been a better way of phrasing it FC. I also hope we get opposing stands for say 2K visitors fans and some marketing to help fill our stadium. I would really like to see Fordham play some night games as I think this could do a lot for attendance and recruiting. Rambacker, right now I think Fordham is a second class citizen in college athletics (I-AA in football, basketball team still down and the league right now is weak, most of our teams have losing records). It could be worse though - we could be Div II or III. (NT) -- DamnRam, 09:15:23 12/10/04 Fri

While I don't agree that Fordham should abandon the PL, I can't argue with your assment of the program. About 10 years ago UConn did a strategic plan for athletics. They then created a volunteer committee consisting mostly of heavy hitter alums who were charged with coming up with the funding. I don't suggest Fordham should invest the resources in athletics that UConn has, but I have to think if a committee like this was formed, we could at least drive the facility issue that doesn't look like is being addressed. If we aren't going to make the investment, we should get out of D-1! (NT) -- An Old Coach, 11:39:45 12/10/04 Fri

Get out of DI! I find that to be a bit extremist. (NT) -- J�Dete93, 15:05:17 12/10/04 Fri

I think our limitations are so severe due to our facilities, that we can't consistantly compete in any sport. If that is the case, what is the point? When UConn did its strategic plan, each sport was evaluated. The first question asked if the athletic department was willing to provide the resources for it to win a Big East championship. I think we need to do something very similar. If we aren't going to provide the resources to win an A-10 or PL championship, why are we spending millions of dollars per year on athletics? (NT) -- An Old Coach, 17:10:50 12/10/04 Fri

I am not saying that we should continue to spend the amounts we are if we don't plan to make the necessary commitments, but I also don't think it means that we would need to drop to DII or III. Many a school with lesser facilities competes in DI. I still contest that Fordham's biggest problem is the exorbitant amount of varsity sports we sponsor for a school of our size with average facilities. The idea that we want to add 2 more women's sports seems insane to me. (click to read more inside) -- J�Dete93, 20:59:40 12/10/04 Fri

I agree we probably have too many sports as it is. Our biggest problem with our two primary men's sports is facilities. Coffey Field and the RHG identify your program and are terrible. Can we occasionally catch lightning as we did in football 2 years ago? Ya, once in a while. Those facilities will preclude us from being consistantly competitive. Don't tell me about St. Joes. Those are special circumstances. Without a new stadium and athletic center, we can't compete in the big picture. (NT) -- An Old Coach, 07:55:57 12/11/04 Sat

Rambacker, FU has certain financial constraints. We would all love to see a 20M seat stadium, parking for 6M cars and a convocation center tomorrow, but that is not going to happen, not at this time. In my comments I specifically stated, "more or less". You chose to take the statement out of context. For now, and perhaps the next several years, the upgrades are what we have. I believe that if FU maximizes what they are doing right now, we would have a pretty good facilities situation. I was not laying out a master plan, but rather commenting on the present and near future. (NT) FC 10:51:34 12/10/04 Fri

My comments were not made out of context. Every university in the country has financial restraints. We have a larger endowment than many schools that have long ago made a commitment to athletic facilties. It's a matter of priorities. Stop making excuses for poor decision making at Fordham. We need to move on a capital plan for athletics, and in the very near future. The natives(alums) are getting very restless and this will hit Fordham in the pocketbook sooner than later. (NT) -- Rambacker, 20:46:16 12/10/04 Fri

This is where I disagree with you. It can't see it ever hitting us in the pocketbook because the University has never been committed to athletics in a real way. I wish it were different but there has never been any attempt to produce data that shows our alums care all that much. I would guess that less than 5 percent of the endowment is dedicated to athletics. We know that few facilites were paid for with external funds. The pocketbook has always been empty. I think the administration is comfortable with that. (NT) -- An Old Coach, 08:01:33 12/11/04 Sat

You're viewing the old FU. not the new. Over 20 years, we've built 1st rate dorms, a great library & renovated the campus. We have a President that for the 1st time commissioned a study to guide us into the future. He asked that athletics be part of this. When complete, the study will recommend competing in basketball at the highest level to promote FU. The Board/President have an open mind on this issue. If expectations are low, we'll get nothing. It's up to us to make our position clear. State of the art facilities CAN happen. It's time to get going & make it happen. (NT) -- Rambacker, 09:00:55 12/11/04 Sat

I would like to think you are right. He is running out of credibility on the issue, though. I agree, Fordham is doing everything in a first rate manner, with one exception. To think that the administration is worried about a decrease in donations over athletics, is a little overstated. Were that the case, something would have been done a long time ago. (NT) -- An Old Coach, 11:06:00 12/11/04 Sat

Our future will be much clearer when the study is completed in October of 2005. In the interim, it's crucial to make our voices heard with Fr. McShane and the Board. (NT) -- Rambacker, 12:17:35 12/11/04 Sat

I disagree FC. The facilities upgrades are going to help, but unless they are more substantial than I have been lead to believe it still leaves us with very average facilities. And I feel I am being generous when I say that. (NT) -- J�Dete93, 00:47:45 12/11/04 Sat