GrandKlegal wrote:
Reader of things wrote: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.
Except Harvard has the same situation in the same city and does OK.
Ahh c'mon you know comparing Harvard to BC isn't apples to apples. BC is an excellent school, but Harvard is Harvard. Additionally Harvard has wicked generous fin aid that caps what you pay at ~10% of your parent's annual income.
Surprised no one has really mentioned a key issue -- Title IX. BC gives a ton of money on the men's side to football in hockey. That has to be balanced by girls money, which goes into basketball and hockey. But those don't balance, so BC has to give out more money to peripheral girls sports while giving other mens sports virtually zero.
As for recruiting at BC, I can tell you when I was accepted to the school I emailed the coach as a 49.8 400m/54.6 400mH/1:57split guy who only ran track for 2 years of HS and couldn't even get an answer...wasn't expecting money obviously, but I figured that would be worth his time and a potential walk on spot. Like others in this thread have suggested perhaps they just don't do that., which seems illogical.
Actually Harvard and BC are not in the same city. And Harvard has both an indoor and outdoor track. BC has a path around a reservoir.
sfslgajlkgesg wrote:
Ahh c'mon you know comparing Harvard to BC isn't apples to apples. BC is an excellent school, but Harvard is Harvard. Additionally Harvard has wicked generous fin aid that caps what you pay at ~10% of your parent's annual income.
Surprised no one has really mentioned a key issue -- Title IX. BC gives a ton of money on the men's side to football in hockey. That has to be balanced by girls money, which goes into basketball and hockey. But those don't balance, so BC has to give out more money to peripheral girls sports while giving other mens sports virtually zero.
As for recruiting at BC, I can tell you when I was accepted to the school I emailed the coach as a 49.8 400m/54.6 400mH/1:57split guy who only ran track for 2 years of HS and couldn't even get an answer...wasn't expecting money obviously, but I figured that would be worth his time and a potential walk on spot. Like others in this thread have suggested perhaps they just don't do that., which seems illogical.
I'm not saying it's the same thing at Harvard and BC. I'm saying that Harvard has similar restrictions (or more) on recruiting and yet they are competitive.
Surely you know that a huge number of kids across NE dream of attending BC. How they fail to exploit that in recruiting is beyond me. And, your second paragraph is EXACTLY my point. They are apathetic at best when it comes to recruiting. They're hardly alone, but that doesn't make it acceptable. I had an athlete almost identical to you. He got into BC and really wanted to go there. They all but discouraged him from coming out. He ended up scoring at ACC one year .... the ONLY individual competitor on the team to do so (embarrassing ...). I had another athlete who was basically told not to bother. He went on to be all-Big East and made it to nationals as part of a team in XC.
I have routinely talked with kids at camps that I coach at who had times as fast as some of their athletes who were told they could not walk on but maybe after a year of club track they might be allowed.
Bad recruiting and bad coaching is a bad combo.
Use a map wrote:
Actually Harvard and BC are not in the same city. And Harvard has both an indoor and outdoor track. BC has a path around a reservoir.
For god's sake, are you really going to nitpick that one? Don't be a pedant.
BC routinely practices at Harvard's indoor track, by the way.
As for the fact that they don't have an outdoor track anymore ... that is an embarrassment to be sure.
;) wrote:
I agree with you for the most part.
I don't care what limitations they have though, the coaching is not doing enough.
What exactly should the coaches be doing that they are not already doing?
Tim Ritchie is leaving BC to pursue his professional career full time.It will be interesting to see what happens to the program.
Beaner wrote:
;) wrote:I agree with you for the most part.
I don't care what limitations they have though, the coaching is not doing enough.
What exactly should the coaches be doing that they are not already doing?
Beaner wrote:
;) wrote:I agree with you for the most part.
I don't care what limitations they have though, the coaching is not doing enough.
What exactly should the coaches be doing that they are not already doing?
Actively recruiting would be a start. Maybe focus on competitive HS teams at Catholic HS's in NE. I coached at a Catholic school for years and never received a letter for one of my athletes. And yes, many of those athletes competed at schools as good as or better than BC both academically and athletically. At my current school I have experienced similar apathy in recruiting. BC is inarguably the most popular school in New England. How they can't parlay that into a more successful track/XC program, even based around walk-ons, is beyond me.
At the very least, you got me to look up "pedant".
Inarguably the most popular school in New England? I think you'd get a lot of argument on that one.
Most of Umass is thru alumni donations, although they did get a new track about 8 years ago due to building something over the old one and a Mass law about replacing facilities. They actually cut indoor track for men in the early 2000's, so the team has come a long way. All the scholorship money does come from an alumni trust that's been set up. Obviously no powerhouse but they've been competitive within the A10 (finished 2nd in cross and are generally around 4-5th in track).
Use a map wrote:
Inarguably the most popular school in New England? I think you'd get a lot of argument on that one.
What school would you say is more popular?
Use a map wrote:
Actually Harvard and BC are not in the same city. And Harvard has both an indoor and outdoor track. BC has a path around a reservoir.
Harvard's indoor and outdoor tracks are in Boston.
sfslgajlkgesg wrote:
As for recruiting at BC, I can tell you when I was accepted to the school I emailed the coach as a 49.8 400m/54.6 400mH/1:57split guy who only ran track for 2 years of HS and couldn't even get an answer...wasn't expecting money obviously, but I figured that would be worth his time and a potential walk on spot. Like others in this thread have suggested perhaps they just don't do that., which seems illogical.
Maybe they had hit their roster limit which is likely tiny if Title IX is playing a big role here? Either way, I understand it would have been nice to get a response, but they probably saw your marks would have never done anything in the ACC without MAJOR development over 3 - 4 years...and probably weren't/aren't investing in development of the sprints/hurdles anyway. As bad as they are, they didn't need more bad dudes to manage...probably lots of guys at that level or better willing to walk on & they have to draw the line somewhere. Just a perspective from a someone who has to do exactly this.
Keep in mind you guys have no idea what the administration wants (other than a sh!tty men's program with few men on zero scholarship) or is telling that staff to do. I spent a stint at a DI school a while back with a HORRIBLE culture...so I had to ruffle some feathers & let some kids go if they weren't on board for changing things...but these privileged kids with powerful parents liked things the way they were...last place every year having been years without beating DI competition. My AD quickly told me not to rock the boat, just show up, give them what they want & keep them happy and graduating ("without scholarship, your students aren't coming to this school to run."). Needless to say, I didn't stick around very long. Needless to say, they still suck. Needless to say, that's exactly what they and the administration wants. Maybe this is the situation at BC?
They will continue to coast for a while. The program is a little bit in disarray right now. Lots of upperclassmen dropped from the team the past few years. The coach has certainly made some unpopular decisions and driven away not only some athletes but also asst coach Tim Ritchie (who did all the recruiting).
I think that Matt Kerr needs to make a commitment to turn the team around. I think he wants to stay there. He needs to put a focus on keeping the talented runners he has and recruiting better.
None of the administration stuff is going to change. funding won't change. Scholarships wont change. There will be no track. It is going to take some hard work. Big question is whether he wants to do it.
Does BC have any football players on the track team?
10+ year DI P5 Coach wrote:
sfslgajlkgesg wrote:As for recruiting at BC, I can tell you when I was accepted to the school I emailed the coach as a 49.8 400m/54.6 400mH/1:57split guy who only ran track for 2 years of HS and couldn't even get an answer...wasn't expecting money obviously, but I figured that would be worth his time and a potential walk on spot. Like others in this thread have suggested perhaps they just don't do that., which seems illogical.
Maybe they had hit their roster limit which is likely tiny if Title IX is playing a big role here? Either way, I understand it would have been nice to get a response, but they probably saw your marks would have never done anything in the ACC without MAJOR development over 3 - 4 years...and probably weren't/aren't investing in development of the sprints/hurdles anyway. As bad as they are, they didn't need more bad dudes to manage...probably lots of guys at that level or better willing to walk on & they have to draw the line somewhere. Just a perspective from a someone who has to do exactly this.
Those times in 400m and 400H would be immediately competitive at BC. He could be in the running for 4x400 as a freshman. 54.6 would be in the ballpark for making finals at the New England Championships.
;) wrote:
Use a map wrote:Inarguably the most popular school in New England? I think you'd get a lot of argument on that one.
What school would you say is more popular?
Harvard, Yale, Brown, Williams, Middlebury, Tufts, MIT, ...
Use a map wrote:
;) wrote:What school would you say is more popular?
Harvard, Yale, Brown, Williams, Middlebury, Tufts, MIT, ...
More selective? Sure. But when you talk about schools that NE kids want to go to and root for? Tufts? MIT? Really?
;) wrote:
GrandKlegal wrote: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.
Except Harvard has the same situation in the same city and does OK.
The difference is that people want to go to harvard and will pay for it. Harvard also gives out a lot more grant money for everyone.