Sunday, November 13, 2011

Flood Gates

Roar Lions Roar is brought to you by

*** REMEMBER Enter the coupon code “ROARLIONS” for a 10% discount off anything on the site!***

Roar Lions Roar is also brought to you by IvySport.

You can check out IvySport's Columbia products here.

Cornell 62 Columbia 41

Why Cornell Won

Big Red QB Jeff Mathews put on a passing clinic, going an incredible 40 of 46 for 521 yards, five TD's and no INT's. Cornell never let up, scoring on all but three of its possessions, not including the kneel downs at the end of each half.

Why Columbia Lost

The Lions defense had no answer for the flurry of short passes everyone in America knew they would be facing all day. And once again, Columbia came out flat in the third quarter, abandoning the quick passing attack that had earned them a first half lead.

Key Turning Point

-Leading 34-28 to start the third quarter, the Lions went three and out on their first three possessions and Cornell took over each time and scored a FG, a TD, and another TD. The game was essentially over after that.

Columbia Positives

QB Sean Brackett and WR Kurt Williams put up huge numbers, mostly in the first half. Brackett finished with 409 yards passing, and four TD passes. Williams had 12 catches for 191 yards and three TD's.

Converted DB Marquel Carter had 12 tackles from the linebacker position and he looked generally sharp.

Columbia Negatives

The Lions had no answer for Mathews, save for three sacks that hardly broke his stride.

The third quarter nightmares continued as the Columbia coaches abandoned what had worked nicely in the first quarter and stalled the offense.

Columbia MVP

Kurt Williams


At Sun Nov 13, 09:52:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The definiton of failure is to repeat the same things have haven't worked in the past and to hope for a different result. Our coaches epitomize this failing. I put the blame at the top. Bollinger and Campbell do not get it. They do not realize what a positive effect a winning football and basketball program will have on campus. It is admittedly easier to achieve success in basketball. But this administration does not appreciate how angry and disappointed some of our most loyal alumni have become. I find it incredible that no provision has been made for new athletic facilities in conjunction with the move to Manhattanville. Why can't we fix this? Answer: because Bollinger and the Trustees don't care. We should be flooding Bollinger's and Campbell's inbox with emails and letters demanding a change. Now. Not next year. Not after the ove to Manhattanville. Now. And of course the entire coaching staff has to go. Let's make sure we pay what it takes to get a top flight candidate and top flight assistants.

At Sun Nov 13, 09:53:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

How do we write to Bollinger and Campbell? Does anybody have email addresses? Are letters more effective than emails?

At Sun Nov 13, 10:24:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't want to offend anyone with the following comments, so consider this an apology in advance for my potential coarseness:

-We don't give athletic scholarships, so what is it exactly that makes a kid want to play sports in the Ivies and still run up a big tuition bill? The unspoken belief that playing sports allows these kids entrance into a school like Columbia that otherwise they couldn't get into.

Let's explore that idea for a moment: while that is true for maybe 80% of the non-minority kids, most of the minority kids could probably still get in to Columbia without being recruited athletes. It's not like we're running some kind of charity admissions program for the 110 football players.

The point is, we ask these kids to come to Columbia, pay the crazy tuition, undertake a rigorous practice schedule and still keep up the grades.

The least we can do is show them a small example of effort and commitment to winning.

Similarly, the administration continues to ask for, and get big donations for athletics. I like the Campbell Center, even the design, but I gave my money to help get us some wins for the two sports that matter most: football and men's basketball. Baseball's improvement is nice, and so is men's soccer... But we need a lot more. I also think a great job has been done marketing the teams considering we're not winning. But it all comes down to winning. I feel cheated a lied to by those who keep telling us winning is around the corner.
I will give men's basketball a pass for now as Kyle Smith seems to be making improvements, but his hiring was actually a disappointment to me. Who ever heard of him beforehand? Again, he may turn out to be great, but we keep going after no-names, and I don't think money is the reason. I think the reason is half the administration is afraid of bringing a real "jock" on campus and the other half wants to win but wants the full credit for it, they don't want to be dwarfed by a big name coach.
What's most infuriating is hearing people like NBA commissioner David Stern joking about our athletics. He did just that in that 250th CU anniversary movie Ken Burns made for PBS. It was sickening. I realize Stern must consider his service on CU's board to be some kind of "balance" away from his NBA time, but for our student athletes it was a grave insult. These kids are putting their time, bodies, and careers on the line for Columbia. Either take them seriously, help them win, or get rid of athletics altogether. And since eliminating athletics would force Columbia's expulsion from the Ivy League, that's not going to happen. I would like David Stern to visit with every football player and their parents and explain why we should just shrug off the losing and take it as a joke.

The bottom line:

Columbia needs to hire a big name coach. A major personality who will dominate the athletic department, or at least make everyone forget about it.
It must also show a consistent commitment to winning all the time. Imagine the GREAT message CU could have sent 6 weeks ago if the AD had fired Norries after the Princeton loss like Jake insisted! Instead, the administration screwed the seniors and decided to hold off. Who cares if these kids go 0-10? Firing Norries would be uncomfortable.
That's what these people think.

At Sun Nov 13, 10:45:00 PM GMT+7, Blogger Bob L said...

Les ipsa loquitor- the thing speaks for itself- The Columbia football team's downward run under the tutelage of the current coaching staff and athletic directorship speaks for itself. Where is the commitment to athletic excellence the alumni have been hearing about. Why won't the Columbia administration and the Board of Trustees do whatever is necessary to allow Columbia to be competitive in football? With New York as a selling point as well as the University, there is no reason why Columbia should not be able to recruit first rate coaches as well as student-athletes. This is the media capital of the world. A football coach who took the job at Columbia and produced winning teams would be deified.

At Sun Nov 13, 10:53:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob, you just answered your own question. Columbia would be HORRIFIED if a football coach were deified. Bollinger would be insanely jealous, and Dianne would be put out by not being able to control such a person, which she abhors almost as badly as she does speaking with other adults.
Have you ever seen a Columbia prez who chases TV cameras as much as Lee?His latest crusade is the insane notion that taxpayers should bail out the newspaper business. When he meets with students, all he does is quiz them on what newspapers they read and he frowns like a tot when they tell him they get their news online. Imagine if a Columbia football coach and team started making the pages of the Post, the News and the Times... And not HIM?

At Sun Nov 13, 10:59:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

We are new to Columbia athletics,I wish we would have looked into the program a bit deeper and saw how UNimportant it was to the administration. My son had other offers to good schools, but not as highly ranked as Columbia. He knew attending C with their status and reputation would only benefit him in the future. This still holds true, and he studies his butt of trying not to fall behind.Also the tuition is quite a stretch. .That brings us to football.This great love and passion for football that he once had is gone.He did not do that to himself, it is because of the TIME and WORK he has put into the sport , and for what? He would tell you it is not about the losses that have turned him off, he would tell you it is all about the coaching staff.How they run practices...all negative.How they communicate...all negative. Just plain mean and no regard for the team.He won't come clean as to exactly what goes on, but for those of you who have upper classmen that play, I am sure you know very well what goes on. I not only think that Bollinger and Campbell and D. Murphy need to make a change because of their poor record, but they need to look into the coaching staffs pure lack of humanity where this team is concerned.They need to bring someone in that can instill that love for football again.And according to what I have read here, they need to think about all the money that will not be coming in if they don't act now.

At Sun Nov 13, 11:17:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the parent who just posted, take heart. Consider the following:

-The alumni DO care about football and we will not stand for this. In the past, the administration could tune us out, but now we have this blog and the Internet and they can't pretend we don't exist.

-This blog exists, and only one other school has a similar blog and no one comments on it. Clearly Columbia fans are special and have a loyalty that the administration has long tried to supress. The same is true of the current students. They'll get into sports more when the admin stops getting in the way of winning.

-Harvard just won the Ivy title AGAIN. Where's their fan blog? They don't have one.

-A lot of people have asked what happened since the loss at Penn last year. And you have answered their question with your discussion of what goes on at practice. It was bad before that Penn loss, but after it one of the coaches let loose with such a verbak tirade aimed at Brackett that was demoralizing and shocking to the whole team. He made it personal and vulgar. Brackett was banged up in that Penn game and this coach made it Brackett's fault. This same coach has done even worse. The fact that Norries retains him on the staff has demoralized the team for more than a year now.

-This time, for the first time, the loyal alums who love football and are very grateful for your son will put PUBLIC pressure on the admin to make the right coaching choice. If the top candidates are balking because of money, we will pledge more. If the admin tries to interview losers, we will embarrass them here and in the papers. They will not get away with this again.

At Sun Nov 13, 11:45:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I mean no offense to posters on this trail, or previous posts, but let's move beyond "inadequate facilities" that encumber recruiting, or winning. Our facilities are not the reason why we are not winning, That is an excuse, not a remedy for success (although I concede that it can be a contributing factor down the road)! The reason why we are not winning is because of poor managerial prowess by the administration and inept coaching by Norries and his staff!

From an administration standpoint, Diane lacks the ability (and courage) to manage athletics properly. The fact that Norries and his staff survived last year is proof of that. I agree, after the Princeton game, we should have all been notified that the University will not be retaining Norries (or his staff's) services new year. Diane is harsh on her staff (as they blindly support her company line and trash Jake behind the scenes). Her handling of Joe Jones' departure; combined with her support of the previous lacrosse coach who had an worse Ivy winning percentage than Norries (if you can believe that), shows bi-polar management by Diane. Furthermore, she is scared of Bill Campbell and Bob Kraft as she uses other University administrators as a buffer during any forma function.

As far as Norries and his incompetent staff go, that matter has been exhaustively reviewed. I would only recommend an Orienteering class for him and his staff because they are LOST! The only support that he could possibly muster would be from the seven other Ivy coaches begging our administration to save him. Everyone wants an easy win.

If we win, they will build something better and more local. I still contend that we have enough already though. A 20 minute bus ride is nothing. The soccer team wins. The baseball team has a couple of Ivy Championships under its belt. Our Track and Field/X-Country teams have to "endure" the same, if not worse commute and facilities, yet THEY win! No more excuses about that, we just need a new coach. Spend the money and get a guy who knows what he's doing and pays his safe competitively.

At Mon Nov 14, 12:12:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The passion here now is wonderful. I've seen the whole history of everything that's talked about here, and of course I've read this blog from its start. Never have I seen this much passion to turn things around. There's been genuine passion for years, don't get me wrong, but this is like a crescendo.
I hope in addition to a top-notch coach and staff, we can get a president who really likes football and all collegiate sports
and all our young men and women athletes.
I love Columbia football and I love Columbia's great intellectual tradition. They certainly are not incompatible.

At Mon Nov 14, 12:49:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the parent that posted and to the response from the alum. My son is an upperclassmen and has studied hard and worked hard acdemically because of the opportunity he has been given to attend Columbia (He was aceppted at other Ivies as well and would have likely been accepted at Columbia without football.) He sees little playing time, but practices hard, lifts weights, and does what he can to help the team. Will he ever be a player that is talked about in this blog, unlikely. Does he believe representing Columbia is worthwhile? Yes. Does he care for the coaching staff - no.

Because of the alums, as a sophomore he had mock interviews with Barclays, Credit Suisse and others. Fast forward and internships this next summer.

Columbia was not the first choice of his parents, but we let him make his own choice and he has no regrets, nor do we.

To the alumni that care about Columbia football and Columbia, thank you. While not finished at Columbia, he entered as an 18 year old new to the city, and he has matured and become very independent.

Thank you to the alumni that have made Columbia very special to him. Thank you from parents that see individuals united as one behind their school. Disagreeing about what needs to be done about the football program, but arm in arm behind their school. Thank you.

At Mon Nov 14, 01:18:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I would add as a positive the improved play of the patchwork offensive line, a problem area this season.

At Mon Nov 14, 01:42:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Like the perfect storm, many components add up to produce a winless season (or an undefeated season for that matter). Blaming one or 2 things is naive. As a newcomer to CU football and this blog, I have appreciated many current and long standing woes. Overall, I recognize that similar sentiment and a culture of losing has been part of the CU football tradition, which is sad. This is most effectively dealt with at the administrative level.
I personally witnessed the cohesion, spirit, and bond that a competitive football program brings to any university, even at CU (yes president Bollinger, Columbia) at this years homecoming. Although we lost to Penn, we were competitive and the game was well attended and the homecoming atmosphere exciting. Even after the game, walking down Amsterdam Ave at 10pm, there were clusters of CU's most eclectic and diverse student body standing around on the street corners talking about the game. Despite the administrations perception, based on the commitment and sacrifices of the players and the nature of the competition, football can have this positive effect on ANY campus in America.

Regarding specific issues raised by bloggers: for Ivy league stds, there is speed on this team. However, when most teams are breaking down film on Sundays, our boys are out running "mini marathon" sprint drills. The ice baths are full and the legs are dead. I'm not convinced this falls on the strength and conditioning coach alone. I would love to see the 40 times pre-season and now. This also likely contributes to the myriad of injuries.

There have been very few adjustments made during halftime of any of the games. I cannot comment on years past. However, this does offer the most likely explanation for past success and recent slide. A new regime comes in and has some success, enough to create some job security. The competition analyzes and makes proper adjustments. If your staff cannot keep pace in this regard, you fall further and further behind. This is the most plausible explanation for what is going on here.

The big fix is a recognition of the value of athletics to campus life by the administration, a university commitment to being at least competitive and getting quality mentors to lead this incredible group of dedicated athletes who sacrifice and endure so much for the program. I will leave it to you who have been through this for so many years to address the details!


At Mon Nov 14, 03:11:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This job is ripe for a total takeover and turnaround. Instead of woe is me, we lose every year there is nothing we can do. We lose recruits to Harvard and Penn.Enuff!

Whether it is the current coach or a new coach, this situation can be reversed quickly. It needs some bold moves and some solid financial commitment.

First commit to upgrade player creature comforts: facilities, travel, atheltic wear, food, etc. Right now the players receive a sweatshirt and sweat pants. Heck, we know they don't have parkas. Seriously upgrade this. It is an essential aspect of recruiting today. Columbia wear head to toe. Upgrade their after practice food service. Fly to Dartmouth, Cornell and Harvard. Cut out a spot for them in the new building, with weights, training room, film room and lounges.

Commit to a PR campaign to put the team on the map. NYC is the media capital of the world. These players are super stars: big, strong, handsome and smart. Get them on the Today show;Regis and Kelly; have them usher at Yankee games; get them appearances at fashion shows. Who knows, the opportunities are endless. This will end losing recruits to Penn!

Advertise and promote a Saturday at Wein Stadium as the answer to high priced, out of touch professional sporting events. $10.00 gets you a ticket and program. Use public transportation to the newly renovated stop. Watch real atheletes playing for the love of the game. View the splendor of the Hudson Valley. Goal should be 10,000 fans a game, sell out at HC.

In one or two seasons of creative commitment college football could be brought back to NYC in a big way. The players to do it are there and they will continue to come the more it works. I'm telling you it is ripe. The resources and opportunities are under utilized.

I posted this last week. In conjuction with an upgrade in strength and fitness and film study, less in season running and other suggestions made today, a plan for success is before us. It is always darkest before the dawn. Let us hope the dawn of a new era approaches.

At Mon Nov 14, 04:39:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Kevin DeMarrais said...

I know people posting on this blog are frustrated, as I am by this horrible season. But personal attacks on Bill Campbell and Dianne Murphy are off base. Bill has given so much to Columbia football, as a player, as a coach, and as a supporter and to think he would do anything to hurt Columbia football is absurd. He QUIT as head coach because he thought it was best for the program, despite efforts by the athletic director to get him to stay. As someone wrote, Dianne Murphy can be a tough boss, but she has done a great job in improving athletic facilities during her tenure -- new baseball stadium, turf at Kraft Field, new field hockey and softball fields, improvements at Levin gym, in addition to getting the Campbell Center started -- eliminating what have generally been considered major obstacles in recruiting. I have no inside information on what will happen next Sunday, and no idea whether President Bollinger will be involved But I am certain that all decisions by Dianne and Bill will be based on what the powers that be feel is best for Columbia.

At Mon Nov 14, 06:46:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

NCAA rules require that the players get a day off from practice each week. Usually that day is Sunday. If they're doing "marathon sprints" on Sunday, which day do they get off? If they don't get a day off, why hasn't someone notified the athletics department (anonymously)? That is a sanctionable offense and must be addressed - if it's true.

At Mon Nov 14, 06:55:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

They get mondays off, sundays are recovery days

At Mon Nov 14, 07:14:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Please, get rid of this coaching staff. But the other problem is Campbell and Murphy are clueless about getting the right man. Let Tellier drive the bus. Murphy and Campbell are out of touch.

At Mon Nov 14, 07:15:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Of course, Kevin DeMarrais is corect, in most everything he says, but except for a few misguided souls, I don't believe that any knowledgable Columbia football fan has criticized either Bill Campbell (who we all love and respect) and Dianne Murphy. The target of most of the criticism on this Board has been directed towards President Bollinger who has done nothing to significantly improve the recreational facilities on the Morningside Heights campus, or to build a world class indoor fieldhouse on the Manhattanville campus. It is also disturbing that President Bollinger has apparently shown no interest in coming up with a solution to the lack of green spaces open to the Columbia athletic teams, or for that matter, the general undergraduate student body whether on the Morningside Heights Campus or on the new Manhattanville Campus. As many have noted on this Board and elsewhere, there appears to be no valid reason why the University hasn't installed artificial turf on South Field so that it be used full-time, year-round by the student body, and part-time by the Columbia Athletic Teams. The Campbell Athletic Center is a wonderful addition to the facilities at Baker Field, but Columbia Football Fans are unwilling to allow President Bollinger to use the construction of the Campbell Athletic Center as an excuse for not doing anything on campus, for the Columbia Football Team, or for that matter, the overall student body.

At Mon Nov 14, 07:25:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As Kevin notes, nearly all of the improvements to the sports facilities have been to the Baker Field complex. The Columbia Administration has utterly failed to make any significant improvements to the recreational facilities on campus. You have to give President Bollinger and maybe Dr. Murphy "F" grades for not improving the campus facilities. In fact, they haven't even come up with a nicer looking gymnasium entrance, something that is an embarrassment to every Columbia student, player or fan who comes to the gym.

At Mon Nov 14, 07:48:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What exactly did President Bollinger mean last month when he stated at at the Campbell Athletic Center groundbreaking ceremony that the powers who be at Columbia had decided to improve the Baker Field's athletic facilities rather than doing something elsewhere? Has Bollinger ruled out making any significant improvements to the recreational facilities south of W215th Street? May I respectfully suggest that President Bollinger clarify what he meant.

At Mon Nov 14, 07:51:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why does Dianne get a free pass? We just had another season pass and not a single men's or women's Ivy title. That makes a year and half of no titles by my count-forget men's football and basketball, we're not excelling anywhere-sorry-archery doesn't count. That is the longest no title drought in the Ivies and not acceptable. If that's her scorecard-which I believe it is-she is failing. Outside of a few men's tennis titles(Bid has run that program for 30 plus years)a couple in men's golf and one in women's soccer(Kevin McCarthy has run that program for 20 years) what has she brought to the party? Football team still stinks, men's basketball is average at best( hopefully that is changing) and we occasionally finish in top 3 in some other random sports. The culture of excellence in sports hasn't been nurtured at all. Not all her fault, but Al Paul who was the worst AD in the history of the Ivies, had more successes-and he only had mens' sports.That's a fact!!!

At Mon Nov 14, 07:54:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Thank you for your response. Yes, Bill has done great things for this University, and he did leave CU Football because he thought that the program would be better off without him at the helm (even as the AD wanted him to stay). However, Bill put the last two coaches in place and this has been a proven pattern of bad decision making. The football committee does nothing without Bill's approval and Diane is scared of him. Yes, Diane has indeed improved the infrastructure of our facilities and the home games, as well as homecoming, are second to none in the Ivies. However, her internal management is in question as well. As a previous poster noted, the divide between her, and a very popular coach, Joe Jones, was handled very poorly. I submit that Diane should do what is in the best interest of University athletics and resign (along with Norries). Do we get a discount if they resign together? As far as Bill, well, anybody who drops that amount of money demands a voice, but he needs to stop looking down from the mountain and invite a few key people to the summit so make a collaborative decision. My 2 cents...

At Mon Nov 14, 09:24:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There has been NO recovery on Sundays.

At Mon Nov 14, 10:01:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I thought 12:11 had some great ideas, particularly the p.r. campaign.

At Mon Nov 14, 10:28:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jake, you started a nice tradition last year by publishing biographical profiles of the outgoing seniors. Hope you will be doing that again. Thanks for all your hard work. Good luck to the senior class and the entire Columbia Football Team against Brown this Saturday afternoon.

At Mon Nov 14, 10:30:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jake, There was a good segment on NBC nightly news tonight. It was on Robert Kraft and his late wife.Seems she was a charitable woman who spent most of her time volunteering. Mr. Kraft was very influencial getting the NFL players and their owners to come to an agreement to end the strike. Is he aware of the current FB situation at Columbia.Has he responded to your request to get involved? I'm sure he could make a difference.

At Mon Nov 14, 09:21:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dianne will only leave if she has another job elsewhere. Unfortunately she did not get teh West Point job she coveted. She should leave, involuntarily if that is what it takes. As far as Bollinger, he has overstayed his welcome. He has no interest in athletics. None. And last but not least, the entire football staff should be fired next Sunday. Ray should be named AD and should take charge of the search for a new coach. Money should be no object. Many of us would dig deep into our pockets. I have been a generous contributor to the university for many years,a nd I and I am sure many others would be willing to channel all of our gifts to the football program to get the job done.

At Mon Nov 14, 09:23:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I respect the tradition of the band and for the most part like the unusual/ irrelevant concept.

This week they did something that turned my stomach and everyone in the stands. They did a parody of a football game. That in itself was ok, but, they started with the national anthem. I will give credit to both sides of the field where everyone stood as was appropriate. The rendition was terrible (I think intentionally) and the band members were moving around like idiots while playing it. The home team always does the anthem respectfully and with dignity (The Big Red did that later). It was insulting especially considering it was Veterans Day weekend. To make things worse one member was in the stands and after the show while they were still on the filed he did what looked like a Nazi salute to someone on the field.

During half time (I missed their show – had enough of them for one day) one of their members was on the field with the Big Red band. The band was at the edge of the field encouraging him and disrupting the Big Reds’ show. They were laughing it up, but, it was just another embarrassment to the school. I am actually surprised security didn’t remove him. Then again it was an Ivy game.

It would be nice to see the school take some type of disciplinary action against the students involved. I also think the school needs to formally apologize for their behavior. Their irrelevance is great, but, there is a point where it can go too far and that happened this week. In reality I expect nothing to happen.

At Mon Nov 14, 10:59:00 PM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the 6:23 poster,let the AD know about this, there is no excuse for disrespect! Let someone know who would be ashamed as you were,Maybe Bolinger. I would rather not have a band than to have the circus performance that goes on out there every home game.

At Tue Nov 15, 12:04:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let's not get into ex- bb coach Jones and how he was treated or wasn't. BB was going nowhere under him although he made a big personality splash before reality set in. Another "nice" person. Swell, I expect all people to be nice; I really do, but we're talking about getting some decent results. Smith seems to know what he's doing, but it's early yet.The problem at hand is football and the next coach. Yes, facilities are very important too but first things first.

At Tue Nov 15, 12:37:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

For two excellent posts re strength & conditioning and stiff legs (written at the end of last season) please read:

Dec 01, 2010 6:41 PM
Dec 02, 2010 9:11 AM

I am a parent of an ex-player and these two posts are spot on.

At Tue Nov 15, 02:27:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

how can we find the blogs from last Dec. 1 and 2 re conditioning and tired legs?

At Tue Nov 15, 02:33:00 AM GMT+7, Blogger Jake said...

Here you go:

A follow up on my previous post a while ago.

All season long there has been a clamor for increased strength and conditioning. Now, once again, I think that criticism is misdirected.

When we analyze the 2010 statistics it is apparent that Columbia dramatically out scored their opponents in the fourth quarter. Once again, I do not intend to be disagreeable, but the statistics clearly indicate that Columbia is not "out conditioned". Quite the contrary, I argue that they may be the best conditioned team in the Ivy League when the data of scoring by quarters are analyzed. Columbia rocks in the fourth quarter.

Now the strength issue, it is difficult to come to any statistical analysis from the data provided, other than to say rushing statistics etc.. In those type of categories Columbia was in the middle of the pack. My eye test says they were not up to snuff in the strength department and on line play. Obviously, the Penn game was a litmus test that was failed.

My belief, is that the team starts the games too slow and the reason is that the team is practicing too intensely during the middle of the season to the end. Everything appeared fine until about mid season. Most games I questioned when the real team would get off the bus. Usually there was little liveliness until the middle of the third quarter. My question is if the team and coaching staff are trying too hard. As the season progressed the players legs appeared dead. This team was running on fumes at the end of the season. I wonder if the team is pushing too hard as the season progresses and not backing off the legs later in the season and during the later part of game week? As school gets more involved and the season's hits accumulate this team definitely wore down dramatically. But curiously the team was able to respond dramatically in the fourth quarter. It didn't appear so much as conditioning as their "condition". This was a slow starting stiff legged team at the BEGINNING of games from mid season and progressively increased as the season wore on.

I think this may be the key area to examine in the off season. The conditioning program is fine, the strength program is mediocre and needs improvement, and consider the "condition" of the team as the season progresses and consider resting the legs when indicated. These guys are just trying too hard and at times working against themselves.

At Tue Nov 15, 02:34:00 AM GMT+7, Blogger Jake said...

And here is the second post

No one that I know has ever said that CU was out conditioned. Endurance and hitting wise they are one of the toughest teams around. The legitimate complaint is that CU has been out muscled by some of the top teams.

The strength portion of CU's strength and conditioning program is embarrassingly lame. Silly exercises. Low weight, high rep time wasters. Following the current faddish nonsense. No emphasis on getting really, really strong. There are seniors who have followed the program diligently for three years who are hardly any stronger than they were coming out of high school.

To get really strong you need to lift heavy weights for low rep sets, several times a week. Real strength building exercises like: Front & Back Squats, Power Cleans, Hang Cleans, Dead Lifts, Romanian Dead Lifts, Push Presses, Bench Presses, Bent Over Rows, Pull-Ups and Good Mornings. They do SOME of these exercises but not heavy enough and not often enough.

If you have a professional strength coach, working with college football players for whom year round strength training is mandatory, and your program doesn't routinely increase player strength levels, as measured by the Squat, the Clean, the Dead Lift and the two Presses, by a minimum of 25% to 30% over three years (and this is a low bar), something is seriously wrong. Taking an 18 year old male athlete and making him bigger, really strong and much faster by age 21 is that not hard. It not an accident that Penn has a superior strength program (probably the best in the Ivy league) and a routinely dominant football team. Harvard also has a excellent strength program. The CU's strength program is one of its weakest links.

On the leg wear down factor, CU practices far harder during the season than most BCS or FCS teams. The ones alone run 50 to 60 full speed, full contact, live plays every Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday all season long. This wears out the players legs over time and also doesn't allow any time for injuries to heal.

Early in the season, most Division I teams only go full speed, full contact on Tuesdays. They do less hitting on Wednesday and no hitting on Thursdays. As the season progresses, they hit less and less in an effort to keep the players healthy and their legs fresh.

Think about week eight. At the start of the game, IN TERMS OF LIVE REPS TAKEN, CU's starters had already accumulated 31 games worth of wear and tear on their bodies, 7 actual games and 24 game equivalent practices. IF Harvard practices like most other D-I schools, their starters would have only accumulated, at most, around 15 games worth of wear and tear on their bodies, 7 actual games and 8 game equivalent practices. Advantage Harvard.

At Tue Nov 15, 03:21:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jake, I don;t think your facts are right. From ESPN: " In an effort to reduce the number of concussions and subconcussive hits, Ivy League football teams will be allowed to have just two full-contact practices a week, three less than the NCAA allows." Can't run full contact three days a week.

At Tue Nov 15, 03:25:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I see . . . that was from last year. So that criticism doesn't hold for this year's team with the new rule?

Also, in fairness I recall conditioning was a problem in the past -- was it under Shoop or earlier? CU teams were faltering in the fourth. So this may be a reaction (or overreaction?) to that.

At Tue Nov 15, 03:28:00 AM GMT+7, Blogger Jake said...

Just to be clear, those posts from last year that I re-posted here came from an anonymous poster. I don't pretend to know much about the conditioning schedule.

At Tue Nov 15, 03:30:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jake didn't write this post. Someone from last year wrote this anonymously on Jake's blog.

At Tue Nov 15, 03:33:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The posts above were written at the end of the 2010 season about the 2010 players and coaches.

At Tue Nov 15, 03:41:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't think the criticism of Bollinger is entirely fair. One of the first things he did as president was to have the athletic director report directly to him, rather than to the provost, the only Ivy other than Yale with direct reporting. The provost screwed up Reeves's tenure, and was the reason athletics had no proposals on the table for Manhattanville (Cole didn't pass them on). The first capital drive for athletics is underway, for $100 million. Facilities have been upgraded across the board, albeit maybe not enough yet for phys. ed. The first new athletics building in decades is under construction -- and though it is named after Campbell it was not funded by him. (When they broke ground they were just over 60% of the way to paying for it. Billy started the athletics drive off with a generous $10 million gift.) The availability of land for building projects is what it is. Campus is pretty much fully built. New land in the neighborhood is prohibitively expensive. Converting South Field is not realistic. (When it was used for football, Butler had not yet been built.) As for open space for student recreation, Riverside Park has always been available and is a great amenity.
I don't carry water for PrezBo, but he's a far sight better for athletics than the last several presidents. maybe better than any of them. Things are happening. Whether it's enough or not I don't know.

At Tue Nov 15, 05:37:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The last poster seems like a bright guy who unfortunately has been brainwashed into taking the party line. For decades, we have heard the same nearsighted, think inside the box nonsense--"Campus is pretty much fully built. New land in the neighborhood is prohibitiely expensive." What a joke. The clowns who ran Columbia in the sixties and the seventies said the same thing, but it was all a lie then, and it is still a lie now. There were plenty of locations on campus to build a world-class indoor recreational facility, but the anti-sports crowd won out over the pro-sports crowd, so instead we ended up with engineering, science, law and international affairs buildings where a world class gymnasium could have been constructed. Off-campus, there were abundant locations for vertical structure gyms in the nature of Yale's Payne Whitney, but they too were knocked away by the anti-sports interest blocs and school of social work, etc. went up instead. Now we are once again told the same thing, although everyone knows that Columbia has this huge area of unused lawn available on the Morningside Heights campus, with plenty of room for a 100 yard x 50 yard +/- football practice field. Maybe the poster friend of the Bollinger administration got mixed up. No one is talking about building a football stadium on South Lawn. We already have a fine football stadium at Baker Field and the construction of the Campbell Athletic Center will embellish the game day experience of the football players and everyone else. What we are talking about here is using a small portion of South Lawn for a few hours a day for football and then opening it up to the undergraduates the remainder of the time. Every Columbia undergraduate will benefit from that happening, not just our student-athletes. Finally, the poster's last comment that Riverside Park is always been available for student recreation and is a "great amenity" is downright demeaning to all Columbia students and particurly Columbia student-athletes. If the poster seriously believes that Riverside Park, or for that matter Morningside Park, is a "great amenity" for Columbia students then he probably is still using non-disposable diapers, or lives on Mars.

At Tue Nov 15, 08:53:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What, is using a public park beneath Columbia students?

At Tue Nov 15, 09:12:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

lets beat brown yeah. Guys, Being negative and upset doesn't help anyone. The players work very hard every week to keep up their studies and fitness. It's not there fault they are losing. They are all very skilled athletes.If we keep encouraging them they could get a win! Roar lions roar.

At Tue Nov 15, 09:32:00 AM GMT+7, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dont you think there was a reason Columbia went away from what worked so well in the 1st half? Think about it...Hmmm... maybe Cornell made some adjustments & what was there for the Lions offense in the first half wasn't in the second. For a smart guy you sound like you dont know shit about football. Usually when coaches do something that seems crazy, they have a good reason for it. Why dont you try asking one sometime


Post a Comment

<< Home