Anti-Scholarship sentiment at Colgate?

[CFBfan]

Here is a letter to the editor from Colgates news letter
Is this isolated or wide-spread in Hamilton? Does it exist at other PL Schools??

Opposes football
scholarships decision
THIS LETTER IS THE FIRST I have written to any editor, but I am so concerned about Colgate’s recent decision to start awarding 60 football scholarships (Spring 2012) that I felt the need to put pen to paper. I have at least four reasons for objecting to that decision.
First, the increasing body of data demonstrates that football players at all levels of competition sustain serious short-term and long-term physical harm. Indeed, I attended a game in high school in which a player suffered a broken neck that made him a paraplegic. In my opinion, exposing student-athletes to that type of risk is incompatible with Colgate’s values as a liberal arts college, not to mention exposing it to potential legal liability. Moreover, other sports can inculcate the positive lessons traditionally associated with intercollegiate athletics.
Second, the economics associated with fielding a football team simply make no sense, especially for small universities such as Patriot League members. Colgate earns little revenue from ticket sales based on my observations and I doubt that TV revenue generates much income. In addition, it is unfair to exploit our student-athletes by scheduling games with teams such as Penn State and Syracuse, with no hope of being competitive, in order to provide a big payday needed to come closer to balancing the football program budget.
Third, Colgate can get a bigger marketing bang for its buck by focusing its limited financial resources on supporting sports such as lacrosse, hockey, and soccer. Those teams play more games each season and can secure matchups and successfully compete with big-name programs. The Raiders can do so with smaller rosters and much-lower expenditures for scholarships, travel, equipment, and coaches than in football.
For example, the 2012 men’s lacrosse team defeated No. 6–ranked University of Maryland and received a bid to the 16-team NCAA tournament, where it beat No. 1–ranked UMass and played Duke in a nationally televised quarterfinal game. Peter Baum generated more publicity for Colgate when he won the Tewaaraton Award as college lacrosse’s best player in 2012.
The fact is that Colgate cannot afford to compete on a sustained basis even with major Division 1AA football programs such as the University of Delaware and Appalachian State, so why pretend to the contrary? The glory days of Andy Kerr and “undefeated, untied, unscored upon, and uninvited” are 80 years in our rearview mirror.
Fourth, I suspect that a survey would show that many, if not most, alumni and current and prospective students have as much, or more, interest in the non-football sports named above. In fact, fewer young men in the pool of potential applicants targeted by Colgate are playing football in high school. That decline has prompted notable sports commentators such as ESPN’s Tony Kornheiser to predict that, over the next 25 years, football will go the way of boxing in terms of lost widespread popularity and participation. When Kurt Warner and other former NFL players say they do not want their sons to play football due to the risk of debilitating injury, you know the sport is in long-term and irreversible trouble.
In light of that trend, why should Colgate continue to finance an athletic anachronism that is on life support? Indeed, as an attorney, I am concerned about my alma mater propping up a sport that is generating significant potential liability for medical problems experienced in the short and long term by players at all levels.
I hope this letter sparks a debate within the Colgate community and leads to a reconsideration of the university’s decision.

[danefan]

That's anti-football. Not anti-scholarship.

Nothing will change those people's opinions. They are few and far between, but they seem to be the loudest at times.

[CFBfan]

Dane I don't disagree but the leeper open with this: THIS LETTER IS THE FIRST I have written to any editor, but I am so concerned about Colgate’s recent decision to start awarding 60 football scholarships (Spring 2012) that I felt the need to put pen to paper. I have at least four reasons for objecting to that decision.

[Go Lehigh TU owl]

Isn't hockey more expensive than football?

I see this as anti football as well. At first the writer wants to make it about scholarship but ultimately rants about the football being stuck in "neverland". The reality is, Colgate has been extremely relevant in FCS over the last 15 years imo. They might not be App State or Delaware but they're still one of the "haves".

[TheValleyRaider]

Every PL (and PL-type) school has these types. Exceedingly wrapped up in their notions of the academic university that they disdain most of the "wrong" kinds of non-academic activities (of which football is almost always the centerpiece). Ours are certainly vocal, though the BOT and alumni are supportive

Danefan nails it, this person doesn't want Colgate to have a football team, scholarship or otherwise

I should also add that there's a certain defeatism in this letter that stems from not being FBS. In short, Colgate used to be great, now we're in the Patriot League, which isn't a big deal, so what's the point? App State and Delaware, fine schools though they may be, don't register on the national consciousness in the same way as Duke or Michigan do, so if we're not going to play them (and it would be unfair to do so), then what does playing football get us?

[RichH2]

Trust a lawyer to rely on mutually exclusive arguments. Football is a terrible waste but gee we used to be something back in my day.

[Dane96]

It's anti-football. Moreover...the writer makes false assumptions and conclusions:

1. You can break your neck doing lots of things at universities, you know like binge drinking, walking across the street, falling in your shower etc.

2. The incidence in injuries to hockey players FAR surpasses that of football.

3. This is not like they are increasing their $$$ spend. They are just officially giving out non-merit money. We all know Colgate players were getting big aid to begin with.

4. I have never read a study, or Tony Kornheiser state, that their is a declining pool of football players to turn to.

This article is ridiculous.

[Seawolf97]

These folks are at every school that sponsors football . More often at the FCS level than say a Michigan or LSU but I'm sure they have nay sayers also. Yet every local community sponsors Pee-Wee Leagues on up to high school football. And kids get hurt at every level and the cost of fielding a team is always high at any level. So this person just doesnt't like football period. Personally I cant see a fall season without a football game somewhere to attend.

[MplsBison]

Dane I don't disagree but the leeper open with this: THIS LETTER IS THE FIRST I have written to any editor, but I am so concerned about Colgate’s recent decision to start awarding 60 football scholarships (Spring 2012) that I felt the need to put pen to paper. I have at least four reasons for objecting to that decision.

Yeah but then his arguments are anti-football.

I can definitely understand the cost part of his argument. But the rest of it is pure bunk because ice hockey and lacrosse are just as much contact and risk for debilitating injury as football. But those are acceptable risks because Colgate can be nationally competitive in those sports.

[carney2]

I shall be the DFW of this argument and, wearing my paranoia on my sleeve, state that the 'gaters don't have it so bad. We are looking at one letter from one (I'm guessing) alum. Big deal. Try an environment like Lafayette where the faculty (who wield more power than is reasonable and probably more than in any other Patriot League institution) and their puppets in the administration are rabidly anti-athletics. Football is the big dog that must be controlled, and they will step in at any time to put the brakes on. Scholarship football has a reasonable chance of success at Colgate and they will, in my opinion, achieve sustained success. At Lafayette, on the other hand, the occasional spike into the land of success will be random and short lived. As former coach, Bill Russo, was supposedly told (no one was there as a witness or with a microphone), "Your job is to win, but not win too much."

[MplsBison]

Man...I just can't comprehend that.

Why the heck would a school just want to have a team, but no desire to make it nationally competitive?

[van]

Man...I just can't comprehend that.

Why the heck would a school just want to have a team, but no desire to make it nationally competitive?

Well, comprehending is not your strong suit anyway.

[Dane96]

BOOM!

[RichH2]

This letter is 1 disgruntled alumni. He reflects only himself. Not at all equivalent to Lafayette's issues. All of the PL has gone svholarship which more accurately reflects our commitment to compete nationally.

[bojeta]

That's anti-football. Not anti-scholarship.

Nothing will change those people's opinions. They are few and far between, but they seem to be the loudest at times.

EXACTLY!!

[CRAZY_DANE]

Just plain anti football. You have to call him out! Don't let this go unchallenged.

His comment about injuries is just BS. The sport with the second most concussions? Girls soccer. Does he want to ban girl's soccer, the face of progressive politics in athletics? Wouldn't that be cruel and misogynistic?

Call this jerk out.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Third, Colgate can get a bigger marketing bang for its buck by focusing its limited financial resources on supporting sports such as lacrosse, hockey, and soccer. Those teams play more games each season and can secure matchups and successfully compete with big-name programs. The Raiders can do so with smaller rosters and much-lower expenditures for scholarships, travel, equipment, and coaches than in football.

I love it when someone becomes so enthralled by their argument that they are swayed by their own fantasy economic arguments. Sending Colgate hockey to North Dakota is cheaper than Colgate football playing Lafayette? Really? Soccer will be better marketing for the school than football? Really? Lacrosse will generate more money than football? Really?

Just because someone has an opinion about the economics of their school doesn't make it fact.

[Pard4Life]

Curious for a lawyer he contridicts himself.

If a reason for banning football is that it is unprofitable and a waste of money, what about the other sports that he claims to be beneficial for student-athletes and marketing? The entire athletic department losses money. Only a handful nationally turn a profit, and the ones that do (except maybe Kentucky and Duke for bball) are a result of football.

1) The injuries are a concern, but hockey is just as dangerous. They are slowly improving safety and tactics. And I bet the risk of a student dying from a car accident or alcohol posioning are greater. A HS kid was paralyzed in Minnesota during a hockey game. And kids have died on the court at bball games.

2) Economics don't support the entire athletic department and you could make the same claim for 95% of the NCAA and NAIA schools nationally.

3) His only valid point and is correct, but the fact about being a "has been" is wrong. Lehigh is an example as is their 2003 title run.

4) There is no evidence that there are less kids playing football as a result of the news. If anything, it's because there are more sports to choose from. And if there are less kids playing, it will not affect Colgate's choice of top prospects.

[DFW HOYA]

4. I have never read a study, or Tony Kornheiser state, that their is a declining pool of football players to turn to.


The fallacy of the inductive argument is in play here with this author:

1. Fewer people are playing sports where there are injuries.
2. Football leads to injuries.
3. Ergo, fewer Colgate prospects are playing football.

In fact: the number of high schoolers playing football has increased slightly.

[alvinkayak6]

Most social commentary, including mine, is extremely lazy. If you are going to say that you expect football to die, then you ought to say why. And I'm sure everyone's decisions about athletic participation are based upon how a sport will be in 25 years. xcrazyx

[Engineer86]

Just looking at the pure economics of the football program also ignores the donations that come into any school from drawing in alumni to homecoming or all games. Those alumni then donate money. Football is just one more way to draw alumni back to the school.

[goyotes]

A Grantland article - What the End of Football Would Look Like" http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7559458/cte-concussion-crisis-economic-look-end-football

I don't necessarily agree with the article, but it does make for interesting reading.

[DFW HOYA]

Also from Grantland: football players live, on average, longer and with healthier lives than baseball players.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8274392/comparing-mortality-rates-football-baseball

[UAalum72]

Just looking at the pure economics of the football program also ignores the donations that come into any school from drawing in alumni to homecoming or all games. Those alumni then donate money. Football is just one more way to draw alumni back to the school.
Though I've heard the antis argue that those donations are mostly designated for the athletic department, and therefore don't help the college's educational mission. I have no idea if this is generally true or not.

[Go...gate]

This letter appeared in the most recent Colgate Scene. What I found interesting is that no supportive letter was published.

[Sader87]

What a bunch of you know you what. As many have stated here already, most of the anti-scholarship animus comes from the faculty and a few disenchanted alumni.

Football alumni, especially so at schools where the student-athletes are actually students as well, I would bet, are amoungst the most successful and more involved/giving alumni of that school. I know that that has been true at Holy Cross historically. This has driven me nuts during the whole "non-scholarship football era at HC."

[BucBisonAtLarge]

Gee, interesting the writer did not use basketball as an example...

When you say 60 scholarships on (an expensive) campus of 2900, without qualification, you are already torquing your arguments beyond tolerance. There will have to be a qualified response. These things tend to stretch out over issues of such magazines, and represent the way the entire school community accommodates change. Rather than nitpick, someone can now step up with the 'long view', squashing any number of points. President Bravman did a pre-emptive strike at Bucknell, answering the arguments before the naysayers could launch such an assault. I do not think there is anything approaching Lafayette's open discord on the topic in either Hamilton or Lewisburg. The next response on the topic can be measured and forward-looking. As prepared as we all were for the scholarship 'moment', many of our classmates and colleagues will need to be brought along.

[Go...gate]

What a bunch of you know you what. As many have stated here already, most of the anti-scholarship animus comes from the faculty and a few disenchanted alumni.

Football alumni, especially so at schools where the student-athletes are actually students as well, I would bet, are amoungst the most successful and more involved/giving alumni of that school. I know that that has been true at Holy Cross historically. This has driven me nuts during the whole "non-scholarship football era at HC."

Colgate's football alumni have traditionally been similarly generous.

[Go...gate]

What also made the letter a bit hollow is that in Colgate's case, we were already spending the same amount of money on "equivalencies".

[dgtw]

Football players tend to come from less upper crust backgrounds than lacrosse players. Think that may be why the writer doesn't want them on campus?

[danefan]

Football players tend to come from less upper crust backgrounds than lacrosse players. Think that may be why the writer doesn't want them on campus?

Lacrosse is not an upper class sport anymore.

[GateRaider63]

Just as a follow up to this. You can see 2 responses to the original letter here: http://www.colgatefootballcollection.com/temporary.html

The Scene did publish a shortened version of John Frieser's letter in the next issue (but also included another anti-football letter).

[ngineer]

Every PL school has their share of 'academic purists'. Some schools more than others. But the writer's rationale, as pointed out by many, is undercut by his 'support' of lacrosse and ice hockey. He also is misinformed about the fact that going 'scholarship' does not require spending more money. It's just how it's spent.

[Go...gate]

Colgate has a cadre of individuals in the faculty and administration who are uninformed or willingly "misinformed". That cadre would like nothing better for us drop to Division III.

[CFBfan]

Colgate has a cadre of individuals in the faculty and administration who are uninformed or willingly "misinformed". That cadre would like nothing better for us drop to Division III.

sad and ignorant, is that isolated or wide spread amoungst the faculty?

[DFW HOYA]

He also is misinformed about the fact that going 'scholarship' does not require spending more money. It's just how it's spent.

Yes, at Colgate and Fordham, it's a wash. But at Lehigh and HC, there is a little more money involved to get where they are committing to. At Lafayette and Bucknell, even more.

[T-Dog]

As far as the academics argument, I use this example.

Look at Davidson football. Pioneer League, no schollies and rarely competative. Why should they keep it? From the mouths of several Davidson alums, it's because those alums are more likely to succeed after college due to the skills they learned as football players and are more likely to give back down the road. A huge percentage of Davidson's giving comes from former football players.

So in a way, the school is getting back the investment they put in by having a team for them to play for.

[citdog]

As far as the academics argument, I use this example.

Look at Davidson football. Pioneer League, no schollies and rarely competative. Why should they keep it? From the mouths of several Davidson alums, it's because those alums are more likely to succeed after college due to the skills they learned as football players and are more likely to give back down the road. A huge percentage of Davidson's giving comes from former football players.

So in a way, the school is getting back the investment they put in by having a team for them to play for.

the pioneer gets an autobid. those COWARDS AT DAVIDSON who ran from SoCon Football like the yankees from the plains of Manassas can get into the national playoffs. it's **** like that and the bull**** patriot league that lower the entire subdivision.

[Franks Tanks]

the pioneer gets an autobid. those COWARDS AT DAVIDSON who ran from SoCon Football like the yankees from the plains of Manassas can get into the national playoffs. it's **** like that and the bull**** patriot league that lower the entire subdivision.

The Patriot and Pioneer league have virtually nothing in common- even before the PL added "normal" scholarships. Most PL schools will be better than the Citadel in 2-3 years (if they aren't already).

[CID1990]

Davidson football players are attending a fully endowed school. They aren't on football scholarships, but they aren't paying for college, either.

And- I agree that they should be playing football in the SoCon. The conference never should have gotten into this associate memeber bullcrap, IMO. If you want to come in with your basketball team and thrash everybody, then the compromise is that every road football game you play is going to be somebody's homecoming.

[Babar]

As far as the academics argument, I use this example.

Look at Davidson football. Pioneer League, no schollies and rarely competative. Why should they keep it? From the mouths of several Davidson alums, it's because those alums are more likely to succeed after college due to the skills they learned as football players and are more likely to give back down the road. A huge percentage of Davidson's giving comes from former football players.

So in a way, the school is getting back the investment they put in by having a team for them to play for.

I've heard this argument before, and I'm not sure I buy it. Are they really getting back more per year from football alums on the academic side than it costs to field the team every year? If you subtract out the money donated back to the team itself, and the amount an equal number of non-players would give back in a year, are you really netting more than the team costs the school? And would you have that effect with any sport, or are football alums generally richer and more generous than wrestling or water polo alums?

It doesn't sound impossible to me, but it's not intuitively obvious, either. Of course, what might be true at Davidson might be untrue elsewhere.

[DFW HOYA]

The Davidson case may be an outlier. Just over 10 percent of the male student body plays on the football team.

[Franks Tanks]

I've heard this argument before, and I'm not sure I buy it. Are they really getting back more per year from football alums on the academic side than it costs to field the team every year? If you subtract out the money donated back to the team itself, and the amount an equal number of non-players would give back in a year, are you really netting more than the team costs the school? And would you have that effect with any sport, or are football alums generally richer and more generous than wrestling or water polo alums?

It doesn't sound impossible to me, but it's not intuitively obvious, either. Of course, what might be true at Davidson might be untrue elsewhere.

Perhaps not, but as DFW sort of mentioned in think the recruitment aspect has a lot to do with keeping a team. Most of the young men on the Davidson team would have went elsewhere if Davidson did not have a team, so they view it as an important tool to recruit a certain type of student.

[Babar]

The Davidson case may be an outlier. Just over 10 percent of the male student body plays on the football team.

Wow. I had no idea.

[DFW HOYA]

Davidson's enrollment is about that of Princeton in the 1920's.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Surprised DFW also didn't bring up the fact that a football team significantly increases male enrollment at Davidson. One of the reasons for non-scholarship football is to add more males to the student body. Adding 80-100 men to compete in football can move the needle several percentage points.

[citdog]

The Davidson case may be an outlier. Just over 10 percent of the male student body plays on the football team.

I don't have the numbers but I bet it's not much lower at Wofford. They compete at the highest level quite well. davidson is a bunch of pussies.

[Babar]

I don't have the numbers but I bet it's not much lower at Wofford. They compete at the highest level quite well. davidson is a bunch of pussies.

No disrespect to the SoCon, but it's not the "highest level." And if y'all really don't want Davidson in your conference, you have options.

[citdog]

No disrespect to the SoCon, but it's not the "highest level." And if y'all really don't want Davidson in your conference, you have options.


It's not? Seems like I remember dragging you yankees up and down the field. TWICE. The SoCon plays at the highest level in the FCS.

[CID1990]

It's not? Seems like I remember dragging you yankees up and down the field. TWICE. The SoCon plays at the highest level in the FCS.

Kicked their band's stupid a$$ for good measure, too

[citdog]

Kicked their band's stupid a$$ for good measure, too

perhaps another Battle Streamer is in order.

[CID1990]

perhaps another Battle Streamer is in order.

Heh.

The Battle of The Avenue

[ElCid]

Kicked their band's stupid a$$ for good measure, too

Yup, but I will say that they sort of aplogized by playing Dixie when we visited them the next year. At least that is what I heard. I did not go to the game.

[citdog]

Yup, but I will say that they sort of aplogized by playing Dixie when we visited them the next year. At least that is what I heard. I did not go to the game.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUfXFbekqLY

[ElCid]

No disrespect to the SoCon, but it's not the "highest level." And if y'all really don't want Davidson in your conference, you have options.

As mentioned, they compete at the highest level of FCS. But even more than that, and I can't believe I am defending the rat dogs, they took USC (a top 10 BCS team) into the 4th with 7-7 tie, and that is "competing" at the highest level of college football quite well even if they finally lost. In 11 they took Clemson (top 25 team) into the 4th trailing by one. And that is, again, "competing" at the highest level.

[Babar]

perhaps another Battle Streamer is in order.

A streamer for beating Princeton's football team? Are...does this mean we're competing at that highest level? Aww, yeah.

Oh, and shoving some band members. Breaking a clarinet! But not real band members, Princeton band members. Which are more like the discount band members you get at the one outlet mall if you don't mind slightly large sizes and bad lunch in the food court.

I have no beef with the Citadel, and know a couple honorable and salty warriors who came through that place, but I guess it's my turn to explain that your constant Confederate trolling of everybody, even tiny southern schools like Davidson, is not provocative, or funny, or even rebellious. Davidson's enjoying life competing in the PFL. I'm guessing most of their former opponents wished them well and were glad to see them in a conference where they were more competitive. I'd bet good money to bad that if they were still in the SoCon you'd be griping about their weakness, claiming they brought the whole conference down, and arguing that they should join the PFL.

And yeah, you really could boot their basketball team. But you won't, because it's an asset to your conference.

[Babar]

As mentioned, they compete at the highest level of FCS. But even more than that, and I can't believe I am defending the rat dogs, they took USC (a top 10 BCS team) into the 4th with 7-7 tie, and that is "competing" at the highest level of college football quite well even if they finally lost. In 11 they took Clemson (top 25 team) into the 4th trailing by one. And that is, again, "competing" at the highest level.

Sure, okay. But I think what Citdog means is that Wofford's somehow more committed to football excellence than Davidson. Because they give scholarships! And this is true, as far as it goes. But they don't give scholarships at the highest level at Wofford, and by this logic they--and the Citadel--would man up and fund FBS programs if they were really serious about competing at the "highest level."

Everybody's got their own priorities.

[citdog]

A streamer for beating Princeton's football team? Are...does this mean we're competing at that highest level? Aww, yeah.

Oh, and shoving some band members. Breaking a clarinet! But not real band members, Princeton band members. Which are more like the discount band members you get at the one outlet mall if you don't mind slightly large sizes and bad lunch in the food court.

I have no beef with the Citadel, and know a couple honorable and salty warriors who came through that place, but I guess it's my turn to explain that your constant Confederate trolling of everybody, even tiny southern schools like Davidson, is not provocative, or funny, or even rebellious. Davidson's enjoying life competing in the PFL. I'm guessing most of their former opponents wished them well and were glad to see them in a conference where they were more competitive. I'd bet good money to bad that if they were still in the SoCon you'd be griping about their weakness, claiming they brought the whole conference down, and arguing that they should join the PFL.

And yeah, you really could boot their basketball team. But you won't, because it's an asset to your conference.


davidson was thrown out of the Southern Conference on their preppie ***. which isn't quite as preppie as yours. then, for some unknown reason, were allowed back in as an assoc member. the college of Charleston is now leaving and it is hoped the rest of the assoc members will leave with them. thanks for noticing I'm a Confed......my siggy must have given me away.

[citdog]

Sure, okay. But I think what Citdog means is that Wofford's somehow more committed to football excellence than Davidson. Because they give scholarships! And this is true, as far as it goes. But they don't give scholarships at the highest level at Wofford, and by this logic they--and the Citadel--would man up and fund FBS programs if they were really serious about competing at the "highest level."

Everybody's got their own priorities.

been there and DONE that. Davidson too. That's why they are COWARDS.

[CID1990]

Yup, but I will say that they sort of aplogized by playing Dixie when we visited them the next year. At least that is what I heard. I did not go to the game.

They did. Citdog and I witnessed it firsthand. Damnedest thing I ever saw

[Go...gate]

the pioneer gets an autobid. those COWARDS AT DAVIDSON who ran from SoCon Football like the yankees from the plains of Manassas can get into the national playoffs. it's **** like that and the bull**** patriot league that lower the entire subdivision.

Geez, citdog. Isn't that painting with an awfully broad brush? A lot of PL schools take football very seriously.

[citdog]

Geez, citdog. Isn't that painting with an awfully broad brush? A lot of PL schools take football very seriously.

yeah it is. how about if I say bull**** lehigh?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPnGp1QZbxM

[dgtw]

If a school does not have a football team, they should not be in a conference that sponsors the sport.

[DFW HOYA]

If a school does not have a football team, they should not be in a conference that sponsors the sport.

And yet, as late as the 1980's, there were Division I schools without men's basketball (Miami, San Francisco, Tulane).

[CID1990]

If a school does not have a football team, they should not be in a conference that sponsors the sport.

A voice of reason in the wilderness

[Lehigh Football Nation]

And yet, as late as the 1980's, there were Division I schools without men's basketball (Miami, San Francisco, Tulane).

Not sure about Miami, but weren't both Tulane and San Fran without college basketball thanks to gambling scandals?

[DFW HOYA]

Not sure about Miami, but weren't both Tulane and San Fran without college basketball thanks to gambling scandals?

Miami had no basketball from 1971-88 for lack of interest and a lack of facilities--at various points, they played games at a hotel ballroom, the Miami Beach Convention Center and the Dinner Key Auditorium, a converted PanAm aircraft hangar.

San Francisco dropped basketball from 1982-85 over assault charges against forward Quintin Dailey and allegations that tutors did players ' academic work. The program has never really recovered.

Tulane dropped basketball from 1984-88 over point shaving allegations involving John (Hot Rod) Williams.

The difference between then and now? Money. Even with recent situations at Binghamton or St. Bonaventure, it's very difficult for a school to willingly drop basketball. Football, all too easy.

[Engineer86]

the pioneer gets an autobid. those COWARDS AT DAVIDSON who ran from SoCon Football like the yankees from the plains of Manassas can get into the national playoffs. it's **** like that and the bull**** patriot league that lower the entire subdivision.

Nice try crawl back in your hole.

[citdog]

Nice try crawl back in your hole.






http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=1yqoO9pQk2o&feature=fvwp

[ngineer]

yeah it is. how about if I say bull**** lehigh?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPnGp1QZbxM

xboringx Oh, Cit..you're trying too hard, again.xcoffeex

[dgtw]

Miami had no basketball from 1971-88 for lack of interest and a lack of facilities--at various points, they played games at a hotel ballroom, the Miami Beach Convention Center and the Dinner Key Auditorium, a converted PanAm aircraft hangar.

San Francisco dropped basketball from 1982-85 over assault charges against forward Quintin Dailey and allegations that tutors did players ' academic work. The program has never really recovered.

Tulane dropped basketball from 1984-88 over point shaving allegations involving John (Hot Rod) Williams.

The difference between then and now? Money. Even with recent situations at Binghamton or St. Bonaventure, it's very difficult for a school to willingly drop basketball. Football, all too easy.

If Miami hadn't gotten good in football, that sport was on the chopping block as well. Yes, a school isn't going to drop basketball simple because its so much cheaper than football. Just 12 or so for each gender vs. 63 for FCS football, plus an equal number for women's sports. Then you have to build and maintain a football stadium.

[Mr. C]

Yup, but I will say that they sort of aplogized by playing Dixie when we visited them the next year. At least that is what I heard. I did not go to the game.
Citdog and I sat next to each other in the Princeton press box and witnessed the playing of the Confederate national anthem by Princeton's rag-tag band. Wish I had witnessed the fight down in Charleston the year before. One of the great moments in FCS history.

[Mr. C]

If Miami hadn't gotten good in football, that sport was on the chopping block as well. Yes, a school isn't going to drop basketball simple because its so much cheaper than football. Just 12 or so for each gender vs. 63 for FCS football, plus an equal number for women's sports. Then you have to build and maintain a football stadium.

Just read something the other day in baseball coach Ron Fraiser's obituary that Miami faced the choice of cutting one of three men's sports, football, basketball, or baseball. Fraiser's program survived and went on to win a couple of NCAA championships. The Miami basketball program at one time had Rick Barry as the leading scorer in the country and had Bruce Hale, who went on to coach the Oakland Oaks to an ABA title, as its head coach (Barry incidently became Hale's son-in-law.

San Francisco's basketball program had risen back into the top-10 or 20 with players like Bill Cartwright and Dailey, but was about to get the death penalty for all of the junk going on there. The Dons killed off the program for a few years to clean house, but have never been the same. Teams like Gonzaga, St. Mary's and Santa Clara have passed USF by. USF used to have its games televised regionally in California. As a kid, I loved watching them play. Remember one game where they beat the pants off one of Digger Phelps' great Notre Dame teams. Of course, the Dons have that great tradition of back-to-back NCAA titles in the 1950s with Bill Russell and K.C. Jones. USF also had a great football program at one time.

[dgtw]

I wasn't aware Frasier had died. Thanks for the information.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8862450/ron-fraser-ex-miami-hurricanes-baseball-coach-dies

[ElCid]

Citdog and I sat next to each other in the Princeton press box and witnessed the playing of the Confederate national anthem by Princeton's rag-tag band. Wish I had witnessed the fight down in Charleston the year before. One of the great moments in FCS history.

Just a point needing clarification...it was not the national anthem of the South as the South had no official anthem and there were other songs just as popular at the time that were just as likely to be called the "unofficial" anthem. Long popular with everyone, hatred of Dixie by some is a recent (last 50 years) phenomenon. Shame, since the tune is one of the best ever written. And it was always good to fire up the Corps prior to a long third down play. And me, brought up just a dumb Yankee boy.

[ngineer]

Just a point needing clarification...it was not the national anthem of the South as the South had no official anthem and there were other songs just as popular at the time that were just as likely to be called the "unofficial" anthem. Long popular with everyone, hatred of Dixie by some is a recent (last 50 years) phenomenon. Shame, since the tune is one of the best ever written. And it was always good to fire up the Corps prior to a long third down play. And me, brought up just a dumb Yankee boy.

Great song...Even President Lincoln loved it and had it played at the White House right after Appomatox.

[citdog]

Great song...Even President Lincoln loved it and had it played at the White House right after Appomatox.


he was NOT the President. The President was a Democrat from Mississippi.
The White House is pictured below.


https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSiaSs-_xmMIxv9mt5AVcJx38LT_5LBWc6O0uh1tFB2ofrBtLSFSQ

[Go...gate]

Citdog and I sat next to each other in the Princeton press box and witnessed the playing of the Confederate national anthem by Princeton's rag-tag band. Wish I had witnessed the fight down in Charleston the year before. One of the great moments in FCS history.

I am so sorry that I did not attend that game; my season tix are a few rows below the pressbox at Princeton Stadium. Would have been nice to meet the two of you!

Still hope that The Citadel and Colgate play again as we did in a couple of times in the 1970's.

[jimbo65]

he was NOT the President. The President was a Democrat from Mississippi.
The White House is pictured below.


https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSiaSs-_xmMIxv9mt5AVcJx38LT_5LBWc6O0uh1tFB2ofrBtLSFSQ

Looks more like the "Outhouse" to me We should have burned it.

[citdog]

Looks more like the "Outhouse" to me We should have burned it.


Perhaps you should have but as you found out.....



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9jxtXAHYZc