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. -- 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: 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.

Author:
Rambacker
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 08:37:03 12/11/04 Sat
In reply to: DamnRam 's message, "We are actually in agreement on the overall points but I think in disagreement over timeframes. (more inside)" on 09:09:39 12/10/04 Fri

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

Replies:

Subject Author Date

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