VoyForums
[ 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: 123456[7]8910 ]


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

Date Posted: Tuesday, March 11, 09:14:12am
Author: JACKO
Subject: Re: To: Andy Furman
In reply to: Bunk 's message, "Re: To: Andy Furman" on Tuesday, March 11, 02:41:43am

i guarantee that the new AD comes from either MAAC roots or Seton Hall roots... its just expected that people shoose the comfortable person for this type of spot -- either someone rich ensor recommends from a maac school or someone from seton hall roots (a former asst ad who left to go be an ad in the midwest and wants to come home)... there will be NO major changes, its just too hard to navigate within the current school setting as the school needs cash for the school - the sports programs will always be secondary

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


Replies:

[> [> [> [> [> [> Weakness to your answer -- Peacock, Tuesday, March 11, 12:56:35pm [1]

Funding a full athletic program also brings in students. The main issue SPC has is with obtaining students. Nothing they have done has done one thing to really boost the image that in the end attracts students. People who worked in the development offices can tell you how the applications increased after visits to the NCAA. If you check out the student population you might be surprised to learn how many come to SPC to play D1 sports. Subtracting scholarships there is a surprisingly high percentage of athletes that actually pay tuitions. Athletics brings in money to the school in more ways than the cash flow for attendance. Without the athletic program, as pathetic as it has been, it has kept the school from going under where the resources were sent covering administration mistakes. Why you ask. Because it brought in paying tuitions.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Right on the money. -- Bunk, Tuesday, March 11, 01:36:20pm [1]

You are right on the money. As my boss likes to say, "Everything is connected."

What are some of your ideas to make the program a legitimate, competitive Division I program?


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Weakness to your answer -- Tim Camp, Tuesday, March 11, 03:40:51pm [1]

Any fan who wants to better understand the true nature of a complete Division I athletic program or knows a child trying to become a Division I athlete should read this story from the New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/11/sports/11coaches.html?ref=education

Just about every school that competes in Division I football and basketball has the full number of scholarships in those sports, but in the other sports even the kids playing at the "have" schools are unlikely to be on a full ride for athletics alone.

As Peacock noted, having a broad-based athletic program is an excellent way to attract students who end up filling the rosters, not to mention students who want to be student fans at a school that has good teams.

For a school like SPC, athletes can represent about 10% of the student body.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Weakness to your answer -- oldtimer#1, Tuesday, March 11, 04:44:43pm [1]

Excellent observation.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Peacock -- Dawg 97, Tuesday, March 11, 08:05:53pm [1]

Peacock weren't you one of many on this board that was in favor of cutting the 80 plus tuition paying football team. Kind of contradicts your statement, no?


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Peacock -- Peacock, Tuesday, March 11, 10:44:20pm [1]

No, I wasn't, but when the decision was made I accepted it. The issue was more a lack of committment to support it than anything else. No one was going to do anything to make it competitve.


[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Peacock -- Dawg 97, Thursday, March 13, 09:26:16pm [1]

I stand corrected then Peacock, but i know the majority of the board was for it, which i never understood. If Iona can field a quality fb team SPC should be able to as well. If anything it would be another 80 men on campus who are more likely to attend bb games. Hell the bb team even stole a fb player last year


[ Edit | View ]



[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.