Saturday, October 27, 2007

Jake's record last week: 3-0

Jake's record overall: 23-7

Princeton over Cornell

Tough game for both teams in the cold rain... but the Tigers rebound to win.

Harvard over Dartmouth

Big Green put up a good fight, but go down in the end. Crimson won't let Dartmouth run for even a third of the yards they got against Columbia last week.

Penn over Brown

Another close one, but Penn's defense stuffs the Bears when it counts.


At Sat Oct 27, 08:14:00 AM GMT+7, Blogger Gym Ratt said...

Last week 3-1 ATS

Overall 25-11 ATS

The weather at east this weekend will play havoc on these games.

Cornell -3 over


Dartmouth +14 over

Columbia -30
over Yale

Brown +2
over Penn

At Sat Oct 27, 10:54:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

gym- how do you find spreads on these games?

At Sun Oct 28, 03:50:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The NYP and NYDN usually run point spreads way on the bottom of one of their sports pages. The Star-Ledger is more blatant, but its Ivy coverage is spotty. And you can always to go the web pages of one of the Vegas sports books, their web sites readily come up with the most cursory of searches.

That said, Columbia did beat the spread today.(I'm also sure the various athletic departments don't encourage such "curiosity.")

And the defense played a great first half while the offense sputtered for four quarters. I would appreciate an explanation, too, of why Norries almost lost it out on the field there in the 3rd quarter, I was worried he'd be sent packing for the day for a moment (however commendable his passion).


At Sun Oct 28, 04:22:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

OK; NW got very carried away. There was a really lousy call which was a momentum killer. The refs threw the flag and then put it away, so we lost the possession but not the additional 15 yards. Here is what I saw today. A geat first half by the defense, especially Masorti. Putting Mitchell at the nose and going into a 4 man front basically stopped McLeod (more on him later). The wheels fell off when Rocholl missed another field goal. The second half was a different story, in large part because Yale made adjustments on offense and we did not. The guy who beat us was Polhemus, with his legs. Unfortunately, on ekey play was when Shalbrack, who otherwise played a monster game, lost his man in coverage, leading to a huge gain on 3rd down as I recall. But Hormann had a bad game. the ball was wet, and there were a few drops, but a lot of his throws were just awful. But his decisions were even worse, ichluding a back breaking TD. Mos tmost importantly, in this league a mobile QB is a huge asset. Hormann is not mobile; in fact, he realy just can't run. while he avoided a few sacks he also had some runs which anybody else could have turned into 20 yard romps. He also had no vertical game today. One key factor in the second half was Masorti going out and wining up on crutches. He was having a tremendous game, and his departure really hurt.

At Sun Oct 28, 05:15:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

you guys got smashed by the Yale defense- the best in the nation

At Sun Oct 28, 05:30:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the last poster; how about some gracious comments about the job the Columbia D did in the first half, and how Masorti's injury changed then nature of the run defense.

At Sun Oct 28, 06:43:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Run Defense?

You got handed the ball in sloppy weather in the first half.

Try upgrading from your high school roster, then maybe you can play 60 minutes.

I was hoping Jack would call another TO to try and punch another score in- JUST LIKE LAST YEAR.

At Sun Oct 28, 06:50:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wouda, Coulda, Shoulda

With 7:45 left in the first half:

"Columbia at 7:45 YALE COL
1st and 10 at YALE 24 Jordan E Davis pass incomplete to Tim Paulin."

Blatant pass interference on Paulin -- held as he attempted to come back to catch a poorly thrown --but catchable - pass. No call. Would have put ball within the 10 yd. line.

First play of the second half:

"Yale at 15:00 YALE COL
1st and 10 at YALE 45 Matt Polhemus pass incomplete to John Sheffield, broken up by Andy Shalbrack."

An almost interception --- would have been a great play. Subsequently, Yale marches down for first score.

A gallant first half by the defense; worn down in the second half by a physically imposing Yale offensive line as well as by Polhemous on keepers around both ends.

Injuries to Masorti, Buckley. Evangelist and Russell in street clothes.

The Lions play hard but are young and make mistakes; the coaches are on a short fuse.


At Sun Oct 28, 08:29:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

if you claim that Columbia is playing with a high school roster, then what does that say about a Yale team that played them to a 0 - 0 tie in the first half, and only managed to "salvage" a 21 point victory? I do not believe in moral victories but if Yale is truly the best of the best, then the future looks bright for the young lions

At Sun Oct 28, 08:43:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It says that neither team could move the ball in the first half given the weather. Once the rain stopped, the team that could move the ball did. Columbia could only hope for turnovers.

If Columbia got that interference call, they probably would have gone up 7-0. It probably wouldn't have made a difference in the second half.

I heard a few collective gasps from the parents / alumni during the game whenever NW would grab a kid and start screaming. Since there seemed to be no more than a few dozen people there (regardless of whatever the atletics dept posted in the box), you could pretty much hear everything he was saying well up in the stands. I admit that it was sort of amusing watching him jump on the pile to start grabbing off players (resulting in the flag and an equally amusing argument).

At Sun Oct 28, 09:41:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Wouda, Coulda, Shoulda," indeed. Each week there is something new: against Dartmouth, Russell coughs up the ball; today Hormann has a bad day. Blah. Blah... For heaven's sake, cut the cr#p and win some games. The other weak teams in the league upset stronger squads all the time.

But let's get to the bottom line: The Lions are a very bad football team. Good kids, yes. They play hard, yes. But the positive feelings generated by last season are now gone as the program takes a big step backward. I suppose the coaching staff will have to sell the Campaign for -- ahem -- Athletic Excellence in the off season.

At Sun Oct 28, 11:32:00 AM GMT+7, Blogger dabull said...

I've have come to see that the Yale fan is the most classless fan in the Ivy. When these Columbia puppies mature they will eat you for lunch. That's right, same kids in two years will pound Yale into dust.

At Sun Oct 28, 12:21:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Some Yalies have a problem with being #2 (to Harvard), so they take it out on schools they view as lesser lights. The fact is, the Lion defense played incredibly well in the first half, but eventually lost steam as the offense continued to sputter. Yes, Hormann had a bad day, but I can't say I'm impressed with OC Marino. Caliing that halfback option pass on first (or second?) down when we were on their 25 (or thereabouts) was a bonehead move and we were lucky not to get picked...not that it mattered as Rochell continued to flounder. His punting has been good, however, so I would agree with poster who suggested using another kicker for field goals...makes sense, something the coaches haven't shown too much of, sorry to say.

At Sun Oct 28, 08:06:00 PM GMT+7, Blogger dabull said...

In fairness to Marino, if that option works than he's a genius. It's one of those plays I always hear fans ask, "why don't we ever do that?" but when you call it and it doesn't work the same guy will call you an idiot. Having watched now for 7 games my biggest problem with the offense is the fact the qb wants to hold the ball too long. Even on the small underneath stuff the ball is rarely thrown on time, which most times kills the whole play. When you run this kind of offense and the qb is not good on short possession stuff you are not going to fare well. I think Hormann is better when he has to throw l5 or more down field. The quick outs and hitches you need to sustain drives,not so good.

At Sun Oct 28, 09:13:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree wholeheartedly with the other posters that Yale's "fans" (f that's in fact what they are, rather that mere internet trolls) are classless. There were also more than just a "few dozen" fans in the home stands yesterday, my season tix are around where most team parents and their coteries sit and there were several dozens of them alone.

I've also posted before that a genuinely mobile QB, who can run the option, is key to a winning season. As it was during Columbia's last winning seasons during the Wiley years. I hope another such QB is at least waiting in the wings.

But I saw a great defensive effort in the first half yesterday by the Lions, enough to think this team still has real potential for next season. And I also really saw NOTHING from McLeod that qualified as a proper audition tape for his NFL draft hopes. He's not the second coming of Calvin Hill. Or even of Dick Jauron.


At Sun Oct 28, 09:23:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Yale poster is a classless jerk who probably never played football, even in HS. Ignore him; if all he has to do with his time is troll on Jake's Columbia blog he is is a pathetic creep. And these yuoung Lions deserve better; it is only a matter of time.

At Sun Oct 28, 09:24:00 PM GMT+7, Blogger DOC said...

Field conditions aside I thought our Defense played a fantastic game, especially the way they were able to contain McLeod. What killed them was the Polhemus scrambles and subsequent rollout options on critical 3rd downs to sustain drives. What was NW arguing about on that fumble play? Down by contact? Late hit? Why did the refs put the flag away?

At Sun Oct 28, 10:38:00 PM GMT+7, Blogger dabull said...

CU fans, look at who we started yesterday and I feel the future is very bright. On D the two corners were srs. and 9 underclassmen with six being 1st or 2nd yrs. 5 freshmen starting or seeing significant play time. Offensively 3 sr. starters and the skill position guys are mainly lst and 2nd years. I think after 5-5 last year our hopes were a little too high but hope for the near future is still valid. I think we had the best recruit class in the Ivy and our maturity physically will pay big dividends. Stay the course coach Wilson, our day will come and some of these teams are going to feel our wrath soon.

At Sun Oct 28, 10:55:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sideline midfield fumble on the pass play- apparently one ref said the Lion Receiver's knee was down - but was overruled by the rest of the crew. Then the histrionics by NW - a little bit like the Minor League manager a few weeks back, minus the base tossing. Seemed like it fired up our guys on the sideline as well.

I've calmed down a bit since this latest defeat, but honestly, who can blame Columbia fans with being frustrated with some of the calls - not sure how they stacked up for CU v Yale in terms of numbers and calls for or against- but regardless - when your team is losing games like we are - calls that are borderline or wrong that cost us a possession are hard to take.

Guess some Yale fans are the new Penn fans - and yes, annnounced attendance was 2225, or close to that. Granted when the deluge started I saw many people packing it in; but I remember how many people were in the Yale Bowl for a CU Yale game about 4 years ago - honestly - it looked about 200 people - in relation to the size of the Doggie Bowl. SHow some class Yalies.

Last year's Yale CU hoops game had some pretty obnoxious Yale fans that ran their mouths constantly, to the extent that the gym security intervened. Well, at least their band was not there to play our fight songs off key when we had some bad plays.

CU Backer

At Sun Oct 28, 11:53:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Granted this team is young and that bodes well for the future.I agree in what a poster said before in the fact NW has never been a HC at any level and I think that is being exposed a little bit in that he is regurly getting outcoached. No doubt he is an excellent recruiter but yesterday's penalty and losing two winnable games so far--Princeton and DtMouth-have to make you wonder. He also seems stubborn to make changes on skill players who struggle. Rochell sits anywhere else in the country with 3-9 fg stats(especially with a talented kicker on the bench) and I still think we should be rotating "mobile" qb's in to get a look for the future. p.s. anyone notice that UConn is now 23 in the country and climbing????...

At Mon Oct 29, 12:23:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As a parent of a freshman recruit, I want nothing more than to confirm that my son made a good choice coming to play football for NW and staff at Columbia. Here is what we all can do to have another great recruiting year, which will lead to more wins (there is great optimism about the quality of the past 2 year recruiting classes). Continue to support the boys AND coaches--when we were looking at schools it was easy to sniff out which teams' coaching staff had lost the player and fan confidence and respect, vs which ones thought the program was steered in the right direction. We thought Columbia was headed the right way, which negated alot of the "tradition and titles and fan support" being promoted by the Penns,Harvards,Yales and other D1 programs-trust me,thats mainly what they talked about in their selling of their program-- but who cares as much about that if you're at a place where the staff really seems to care about you as a student-athlete, if they will not expect you to sit for 2-3 years to gain much playing time, if the program is pointed in the right direction, and there is optimism and support from alumni in as awesome a place as NYC? The better recruits will be courted by multiple schools, and all it takes is that sense that the ship is sinking-the antenna is up for this by both parents and recruits. The W-L record of the JV team, the quality and optimism of the recent recruits, the # of starting underclassmen and the chance to play more as an underclassman,the anticipation of better facilities, the commitment of the administration, the confidence that the right coaching staff is in place is part of what the new recruits will look for in a football program, and is what the alumni and supporters need to focus on and promote here at really can help. Columbia U and NYC will sell themselves(Yale,the current nemesis,and most other Ivies from our visits have more trouble selling their cities and the lifetime career developing opportunities that NYC/Columbia offers the student athletes). It will be huge for recruiting for the boys to finish with at least one win in the Ivies this year-thats really up to the boys and NW. Remember, recruits will be in the stands at the games-lets help by showing enthusiasm and optimism, because I guarantee the underclassmen feel it. I apologize for the length of this... enough said.

At Mon Oct 29, 02:19:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great post by CU Parent. The Yale boosters have caught up to Penn in their classlessness. My guess is that this sort of stuff comes from a very frustrated individual. Sure NW got upset; that's what happens when we get lousy calls in profusion. But let's stand behind the staff and the players.

At Mon Oct 29, 03:07:00 AM GMT+7, Blogger dabull said...

I believe wholeheartedly in coach Wilson as the captain of this ship. How do you say he was outcoached when as underdogs on the road we had the ball in position to go in and win against Dartmouth and Princeton? Does Wilson drop back in the pocket and throw a pick? Does he catch a pass and fumble when hit? No. This guy is doing a tremendous amount of work towards turning a bad program into a winner. He is getting young talent in quantity to commit here and he is always promoting CU football in even the smallest way to the local population and alums. I know a lot of people are dissappointed but he is building something here that has not been for quite a long time- talent base.

At Mon Oct 29, 03:44:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was sitting with the maybe 2 students at the game (outside of the women's basketball team). That, to me, is one of the biggest things the university needs to work on. I realize it was raining and there's the plethora of "it's so far on a Saturday morning" excuses, but maybe if the school did something (outside of winning) to get the kids to make the trip, they'd do it five times a year. It's a whole 10-15 minutes. Like waiting 10-15 minutes for class to begin or walking 10-15 minutes to get to your next class. "It's too far" is such an awful excuse.

As for the parents, alumns, etc, I saw a handful sitting toward the top of the premium section toward the little shelter under the press box. I really didn't see ~2500 people. The last Yale home game only got about 1000 and I remember it being a nicer day with the stands just as crowded. If anything, Yale brought a decent amount of fans. I'm not sure if CU goes by tickets sold (which would include probably countless alumns that buy tickets as a donation, but never use them) or tickets ripped at the gate. It's probably easier to use tickets sold. I'm not sure how they count students, but it couldn't have that difficult yesterday.

At Mon Oct 29, 06:53:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As a former football player in the 80's, I would disagree in your "talent base" comment. We have always had talent--maybe not 2 deep talent like the bigger Ivies always have. What we haven't had is backing by the school, alums and facilities to really use as a recruiting tool. Seems that is slowly happening which is good to see. We've had more "talent" quit the football program for the above mentioned reasons then you can possibly imagine

At Mon Oct 29, 08:16:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The crowd gives up on these kids the minute they are down by any amount. There is little support from the stands. It's depressing. Don't get me wrong, I am happy the people who are there, are there. But for God's sake, show some enthusiasm. A strong unified crowd might not help us win, but it sure couldn't hurt. To stop feeling like losers we have to stop acting like losers. Trust me, this will translate to the field. This is a game of confidence and will, and we certainly have talent. Let's show the team we stand behind them. We can facilitate this CU turn-around from the stands.

And also, the AD needs to work with the faculty. Two months ago I sat, as a brand new parent, in a lecture hall at Orientation and listened to a top Columbia College professor trash the football team and the alma mater in front of hundreds of other brand new students and parents. She claimed the Core Curriculum brings students together, not sports like other (unmentioned) Ivies. She implied that intellectual curiosity and athleticism are mutually exclusive. Perhaps NW could speak to her, as he did with a student reporter who was trashing the team. Sometimes I think it's just ignorance (very unbecoming for an Ivy prof). In any case, the relationship with the faculty matters because they are selling the school and creating a school culture, one that doesn't always include athletes and their families.

At Mon Oct 29, 09:12:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

C'mon guys

Is the crowd noise really the key factor here?

In the game day guide it said Yale has won something like 10 in a row on the road?

So clearly, their success has nothing to do with their great home attendance at the Bowl.

We simply need bigger, stronger, faster players.

At Mon Oct 29, 09:44:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obviously noise is not a key factor. I never used those words. What we, as new CU parents are trying to say, is let's change the aura.

To quote a previous poster:
"Remember, recruits will be in the stands at the games-lets help by showing enthusiasm and optimism, because I guarantee the underclassmen feel it."

Please believe.

At Mon Oct 29, 10:56:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To: 06:16:00 PM

Your comment about the professor is very disheartening... why don't you let our AD, Diane Murphy know about this professor - I would hope that all student-athltes and parents would report this kind of nonsense. How different is being anti-athletic from being a anti-black or anti-semetic?

At Mon Oct 29, 10:59:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Many well-deserved thanks to "former football player in the 80's" for telling it the way it is and, more importantly, the way it can be. Fear not, our day will come, maybe sooner than we think. GO LIONS!

At Mon Oct 29, 11:02:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Also meant to include the poster who followed the 80's football player, especially for his revealing tale about that faculty member (who should be flayed).

At Mon Oct 29, 07:56:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'd like to know the name of the professor so that I can drop her a note to the effect that the University of Chicago would be perfect for anti-athleticism. We have some professors who love Columbia sports: including stars on our faculty. As for the others, every university has anti-athletic faculty members, sometimes in profusion. They tend to be intellectual bullies who are more concerned with indoctrinating students than with teaching them to think for themselves.

At Mon Oct 29, 09:08:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the freshman parent: Why don't you just post the professor's name here? It's obvious she wants her voice to be heard.

At Mon Oct 29, 09:15:00 PM GMT+7, Blogger Jake said...

I agree with the poster who said that professors who trash athletes are most likely not educators in any sense of the word. When I teach my classes and I state an opinion, no matter how benign, I couch as such and invite disagreement from my students. I would never say: "X is better/worse than Y... Period!" But not only are people who do this bad educators, they're probably also masochists! I mean if there's one thing any sane professor hates is not having students participate in class. If you just want to hear yourself pontificate, just buy yourself a tape recorder... believe me, it's easier than preparing to teach a college class.

At Mon Oct 29, 09:53:00 PM GMT+7, Blogger dabull said...

Hey 80's Lion, you shouldn't take such offense to my talent base comment. I know there are always talented kids even on winless teams. But you said yourself and Jake has stated many times that we never had DEPTH. This is very much what I'm talking about, thus the term BASE. With a good base of talent you have good competition for spots and you have good guys to step in for injured players. Again no disrespect to any past Lions and their abilities but it is what it is. Never had ENOUGH good players.

At Mon Oct 29, 10:04:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Honestly, I don't remember the name of this prof off hand. I know she teaches a Core Curriculum class/classes. I could look it up, go through the Orientation packet. Even if I still have it, I wouldn't post it here. I thought about speaking to her directly, but was worried my son might end up in her class. And I don't mean to insinuate that all CU profs are like this. In fact, I know of many who are huge supporters of CU athletics. It was more of a problem for me because she was speaking about the CC to a group of new students and their parents. Even two students who were sitting behind me, and who btw looked liked very non-athletic types, whispered something about a lack of school spirit. She seemed to be selling CU and the CC at the expense of athletes and athletic events which create school spirit, something she regards as frivolous and silly.

At Mon Oct 29, 11:31:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

No offense taken on the talent comment just pointing out that sometimes the toughest task is keeping those kids in the program because outside of this inner football circle, there is a ton of negativity that the players encounter all across campus that I don't think happens to that degree at other Ivies. I played with perhaps the best QB, WR, TE combo in the history of the program and we still lost alot of games. Talent certainly helps but backing from the school and student body help just as much. NW will get it done. When these Freshmen and Sophomores are Juniors and Seniors we will win more then we lose--that I assure you.

At Tue Oct 30, 12:02:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just wonder if it was this same female professor, who told my son's freshman core class (last year) that all students who play organized sports are gay. This is just too much! I knew, from the get go, that CU was on the top of the list of liberal schools, but to have to pay the money I do, is, sometimes very disheartening. However, the bright spots are Diane Murphy, Norries Wilson and Jackie Blackette creating opportunities for our boys for summer interning and careers after CU. They put forth tremendous efforts that many of us do not see.

At Tue Oct 30, 12:57:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What??????? That professor is way beyond her boundaries to make a comment like that--even as a joke. Let's put it this way--If a Columbia coach made those comments to his/her team and reversed it, he/she would be fired immediately. I thought the whole purpose of the core curriculum was to form well rounded renaissance men/women--that comment seems to fly in the face of that but in a nutshell sums up why there are 100 people in the stands against the best team in the Ivies so far.

At Tue Oct 30, 01:06:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Please post the names of the 'professors' who are more likely TAs.

At Tue Oct 30, 01:12:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The one who spoke at the Orientation session was definitely a professor, not a TA.

At Tue Oct 30, 02:16:00 AM GMT+7, Blogger dabull said...

If in fact we have professors that openly chide and demean our athletes than they should be reported and the admin. should deal with them the way they would surely castrate some pro right winger that was spouting off his personal doctrine. Teach and expose students to different ideas and views but don't let your personal agenda be a part of the curriculum. It's too bad these athletes have to work so hard to represent the school and perform in classrooms but there will always be the namby-pamby egghead prof. that could never walk and chew gum that will not be tolerant of them. That is not democracy, it's facism.

At Tue Oct 30, 04:43:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As far as campus support, read the voyforum entry about Princeton--zero support for football from the student body. Unfortunately the anti-athletic nonsense permeates most Ivy campuses.

At Tue Oct 30, 05:13:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The remark by the CC professor sounds thoughtless at best, but I wouldn't get my hopes up about eliminating anti-athletics bias among all professors at Columbia or any other American university. For example, her comment was mild compared to Dartmouth's recent director of admissions (see below).

In fact there is a longstanding tension in American universities over the proper role of athletics, and given the history of abuses in athletic programs, that's understandable. Some professors are going to be down on athletics wherever you go--so what? They're entitled to their opinion.

More important is to look at the big picture at Columbia. The dean, Austin Quigley, is a passionate soccer fan who loves to watch Columbia soccer games. The associate dean, Kathryn Yatrakis, is the mother of a couple of fomer Columbia varsity athletes. The admissions office has always been friendly towards athletics. The president of the board of trustees is the former head coach of the football team! Bollinger is at least neutral--more than you can say for a lot of Ivy presidents. Columbia is more athletics friendly than some posters realize.

The key is alumni support. The College and University are very responsive to thoughtful and organized alumni opinion. That is evidenced in the Campaign for Columbia Athletics.

Now for the Dartmouth Director of Admissions story from 2005 when a letter he wrote in 2000 was made public:

Dated December 20, 2000, the letter documents Furstenberg's congratulations to Bloom for eliminating Swarthmore's football program as well as Furstenberg's opinion that "football programs represent a sacrifice to the academic quality and diversity of entering first-year classes."

The letter, which was released to the Valley News and first reported Dec. 10, 2004, has stirred up controversy in the Dartmouth and Ivy League communities, with some Dartmouth alumni calling for the firing of Furstenberg.

"Other institutions would do well to follow your lead … I wish this were not true but sadly football, and the culture that surrounds it, is antithetical to the academic mission of colleges such as ours. This is really a national problem, and it is a good thing that you are taking leadership on the issue. A close examination of intercollegiate athletics within the Ivy League would point to other sports in which the same phenomenon is apparent," Furstenberg wrote to Bloom.

Now that's hostility to athletics. It's out there at every university whether it's deserved (as it sometimes is) or not. So it's not just Columbia.


At Tue Oct 30, 06:20:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What we need is more alumni support, at games and with their pocketbooks. We lost a good chunk of alumni goodwill from '68, and it took a long time to restore it. The younger generations are more gung ho than the generations from the late 60s, I'm afraid. It all goes back to the centrality of the College on campus. The College is the heart and soul of the university.

At Tue Oct 30, 08:53:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re the letter by Dartmouth's current Director of Admissions in 2000 or thereabouts to someone at Swarthmore, I believe it was in fact Swarthmore which once fired its football coach (its black football coach) for too much success. He'd steadily improved the team to the point where it'd just gone 6-3, which made many (oh those genuine Quakers!) alumni nervous that the school was "over-emphasizing" football. And a scapegoat was needed. The end of football altogether followed a few years later.

But, Leonidas. I wouldn't at all characterize Bollinger as "neutral" on the issue of the importance of athletics. Consider, for instance, where he comes from, a place where football and basketball are very, very important indeed. In any case, his attendance at all sorts of events to me shows he cares more about CU sports in general than Rutgers' coach Greg Schiano can be bothered to care about, say, crew, tennis and fencing.

And even as I still thank the Lord for scheduling Marist this season, He/She should also be commended for delivering Dianne Murphy to us.


At Tue Oct 30, 10:10:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maybe we could play Notre Dame instead of Marist next year.

At Wed Oct 31, 12:15:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Would like to see us play against some of the schools we ultimately recruit against--re Holy Cross, Lehigh, Colgate etc....these schools were always in the rotation in the 80's and 90's...


Post a Comment

<< Home