Ladedah wrote:
Now they are in the Atlantic 10 conference, which isn't nearly as intense as the ACC and they don't have football, so it could be a hard sell to the athletic department to switch.
Feel free to correct me if UMass is not in this boat - I was only on the women's team for one year so I could be misremembering.
UMass definitely has football. They even moved up to the FBS division a few years ago.
This isn't a problem unique to Boston College or the ACC- the Maryland men seem to be in a similar situation over in the Big 10. They scored zero points at the B1G conference meet this weekend. I expect that they, too, have little funding.
Because we're ALL winners!
Well, not the OP.
BC has been atrocious for years. They need a new coaching staff and to get someone in there who can recruit. As one of the most highly desired colleges in New England, they should be scoring at ACC's just on the virtue of some talented walk-ons. I'm not saying win ACC, I'm saying score a few points.
They're not going to challenge for an ACC title unless and until they fund the program at a reasonable level. But that's a far cry from not scoring at all in a league that has some serious deficiencies.
Used to be redman wrote:
Ladedah wrote:Now they are in the Atlantic 10 conference, which isn't nearly as intense as the ACC and they don't have football, so it could be a hard sell to the athletic department to switch.
Feel free to correct me if UMass is not in this boat - I was only on the women's team for one year so I could be misremembering.
.
UMass definitely has football. They even moved up to the FBS division a few years ago.
I meant the Altantic 10 conference doesn't have football - the schools that do have football participate in a second conference, like CAA, just for football. A-10 is more focused on basketball
Used to be redman wrote:
Ladedah wrote:Now they are in the Atlantic 10 conference, which isn't nearly as intense as the ACC and they don't have football, so it could be a hard sell to the athletic department to switch.
Feel free to correct me if UMass is not in this boat - I was only on the women's team for one year so I could be misremembering.
UMass definitely has football. They even moved up to the FBS division a few years ago.
This may help explain why they don't have $$ for T&F though:
http://www.gillettestadium.com/umass-football"Why even have a team?"
---------------------------------------------
Because you get credit for fielding 3 sports (In,Out, CC) by the NCAA whilst spending no cash. That's why.
As expected wrote:
No Men's track scholarships.
Damn Shame.
They were the top men's program in New England back in the day.
When was this?
Discoverer of things wrote:
As expected wrote:No Men's track scholarships.
Damn Shame.
They were the top men's program in New England back in the day.
When was this?
Back in the day.
Discoverer of things wrote:
As expected wrote:No Men's track scholarships.
Damn Shame.
They were the top men's program in New England back in the day.
When was this?
Maybe not the top team but one of the top XC programs and decent in track till at least the mid-90's. Remember they also have no track on campus (got torn up when they revamped the football stadium) and no field event athletes.
This all makes it a pretty tough sell to a kid who might be good enough to score in ACC's since there are so many other places to go that would be far more welcoming - esp in Mass. ACC's are pretty damn deep now in all events - so its gonna look even worse then it is. As somebody mentioned they would fit in fine with the A10 but that is not happening.
If barely scraping 30 points at the NESCAC meet makes you competitive then I could agree with that. They're obviously not a D1 caliber team so why on earth are they flying to meets in Georgia and California when they might be able to put some of that money towards a small scholarship. I'm sure there are at least a few talented kids that would love to go to BC and wouldn't mind training without a large team.
That's a no go. Because the administration would have to balance that out with a female scholarship somewhere.
I agree there is some money wasted. Travelling to some big meets when a local meet is more on par with this teams ability.
But the best thing BC can offer is the chance to compete D1 in a Power conference. So going to big meets is a way to draw talent. Show athletes we will send you to meets if you prove you can compete.
Also FYI they haven't been west of the Mississippi in years. They stay on the east coast. Mostly travel south for warm weather in early spring.
I agree with you for the most part.
I don't care what limitations they have though, the coaching is not doing enough.
Shannon Hays wrote:
Add to that winless in the ACC in men's hoops and football. Quite a streak.
Should never have fired my boy Steve Donahue. He took Cornell to the Sweet 16. It took him about a decade to build up Cornell.
Marco Brolo wrote:
Another issue is the cost to attend the college itself. Without scholarships, this is an extra issue. There is no in-state tuition. They essentially have to target the top 10%(wealth-wise) in recruiting. Anyone else don't even bother.
athletes can still get need-based financial aid
I don't know how you can score no points at your conference meet. You can be mid-conference in scoring consistently even with very little $$$ if you actually care a little. Clearly the team doesnt care and neither do the coaches. Fire the coaches, get a new guy to come in and change the culture of the program.
Tim Ritchie was signed fairly recently as an assistant coach there. He dominated for them 8-10 years ago and now trains in the area. He's spoken recently about the recruiting work he does on top of writing the team's workouts. I'd say give it some time....things could start to turn around if he stays. High schoolers take the coaching staff seriously when making their decision, and he's definitely starting to make a name for himself.
Reader of things wrote:
Discoverer of things wrote:When was this?
Back in the day.
Used to regularly have a few national class guys win IC4As.
It won New Englands in 1972.. Keith Francis national champ at 1000 yds in 74...after that..ppphhhttt.
Tuition and board around $55k. No help for runners $$wise ..tuff academic standards ..impossible situation.
Sad to hear the BC program struggles like this. I wish them well, playing forward.
I almost went to BC as I was inspired by Keith Francis, a top half miler of the day. Mid-70s.
Went to UMass instead, in the era when UMass won the IC4A XC title led by Mike Quinn. I was a mid-D track guy, not on the XC squad that did this.
From the mid to late 70s, BC was indeed a force to contend with in track, if not XC.
It was also fun to run on BC's weird track, it was large, like 470 yards or something like that. So you'd line up for the mile after the first bend, where the 1500 lines up on a normal track. It was a very bouncy surface, good for half miler/miler types.